skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Very much so. Both are not rational, but for different reasons.

Flat earth is something that you can readily disprove through both personal experience and physical evidence. Fly around the world in an air plane or sail by boat, see the curvature from high elevation or low orbit, etc.

Religious belief is, practically by definition, belief in something that is not falsifiable. It is inherently not rational (otherwise it would be acceptance rather than belief). There are rationalizations and arguments that some will accept, but the heart of the matter is that belief is the difference between religion and science.
> most people know you can’t borrow characters from big studio productions without facing legal action, so they don’t attempt it.

This fear is exactly my point. It even gets much thornier and much more chilling when the law isn’t as clear (since people proactively avoid things they think might result in legal action).
I think it will be cash flow break even as well. 0 in, 0 out. Except maybe for some legal fees.
I can't see much of a reason to even support such an old processor at this point.
I don't, but it bothers me because the people who win it get to decide what I work on and they are too often fundamentally incompetent.
>Flat Earth is trivially falsifiable.

It's falsifiable, but not trivially. For example, due to atmospheric refraction we can see some distance around the curvature of the Earth. A common Flat Earth "demonstration" / "gotcha" is to show examples of photographs taken of distant objects, that shouldn't be visible because they'd be below the horizon (checkmate, Globalists). The optics phenomena are complicated, and most people have to take it on faith that the physicists aren't lying. And if you already think there's a global conspiracy to deny the Flat Earth, that's a non-starter.

There are a lot of things like this where it's actually a bit more complicated -- some second-order effect that isn't satisfactorily explainable with high school physics. And they have them all memorized as talking points. So a naive debater can get caught unawares and look foolish.
My point is the teams at Microsoft and AWS do not use CUE or any "one thing", that's the problem! If CUE doesn't solve their problem then it doesn't.
Thank you.

> most security professionals (myself included!) aren't equipped to outright "crack" this kind of thing in just a few minutes

When I say 'crack' in this context, I mean review the scheme and point out any obvious flaws, like you just did!

> SHA-1 -> SHA2-256

I should do this!

> reuse an IV

Indeed (there is a fine-print in the creator page that says "don't reuse across messages", but I should just regenerate proactively)

Thank you very much for the great comment!
> outside of college towns, you are going to be surprised at the actual education and literacy levels about anything

Surprised how?
The real lifeprotip is always in the comments
Children born today will see thousands of animals disappear in their lifetime
Can you scientifically prove existence has no purpose?
Nice idea.

password protected zip files are portable too.
>>Evolution is a theory and is not observable at all.

Citation needed...
I would disagree.

Grids are bad for cars because four way stops are really inefficient at processing them. You'll notice in American suburban planning that there are as few four-way stops as possible inside a subdivision.

Non-grids extend the distance of a lot of trips and are thus hostile to slower non-motorized users. Driving an extra 500m is not a big deal for a car but is an additional several minutes for slower users. And non-grids in the US funnel onto very big roads with few crosswalks, so that's even more diversion distance; and then on top of that it can easily take a few minutes to even get a walk/cycle signal at an intersection.

In contrast it's very easy to make a grid less hospitable to cars but also still allow pedestrians and cyclists to take the shortest path; just lay bollards diagonally across an four-way intersection that are too narrow for vehicles but large enough for bikes and people.
Well, diagrams. Apply this force, get this displacement, this is how wheels are out of plane (disregarding that turning makes them out of plane already).

None of the pictures are labeled, and they only show one setup: pressing the pedal without sitting on the seat, without holding the handlebars, while both wheels remain in plane. I'm not sure if it's even possible to keep both wheels in plane when pedalling on a moving bicycle, if only due to pressing on the handlebars.
in any case,[I'm going to personal logic.] I was thinking back to the fact of the weakness you mention of the method I used which, said by more than one person, I don't question it. But I don't understand how that is possible. So, if I have a key that only I know, which would be an array of length 256 which always contains all the numbers from 0 to 255 but in random order. and for each byte (p) of the input file I replace p with key[int(p)]....it seems really impossible to go back to both the input and the key. due to the fact that I can't know what it was before the replacement. What am I missing? Of course there can be repetitions in the bytes and then you can draw conclusions as to what byte it is,yes..but also think if I repeat the same, several times, with different keys?
However, your function rules, I will implement.
Adoption(Actually using crypto as currency) is not in any way a goal anymore.

The goal is now just to HODL till some mythical event where they'll be millionaires/billionaires with a single coin and then just use that as collateral to buy stuff through defi. Very similar to the GME cult.
I guess it depends how you define religion. From the abstract:

> We carried out two nationwide data collections that allowed us to compare differences in the acceptance of evolution in Italy and Brazil by high school students who declare to belong to the same religion in the two countries. Roman Catholic students showed significant differences between the two countries, and the gap between them was wider than between Catholics and non-Catholic Christians within Brazil. Our conclusions support those who argue that religious affiliation is not the main factor in predicting the level of evolution acceptance.

My hunch is that being Catholic doesn't really mean the same thing in different countries, so the conclusion doesn't make much sense to me. Of course it's not the "religious affiliation" that matters but how the religion is practiced. I don't like the mismatch between the title and the abstract and actual study (the title mentioning religion rather than religious affiliation).
Furious, the Fast Design System
Guide to Go profiling, tracing and observability
> ...with the caveat that once Roblox (the company) folds, all the games will be gone.

True, and I guess Flash is a useful lesson in that sense, although no platforms I jammed with as a kid are around either. It makes me wonder if Godot apps written today will work on the web 20 years from now.
I'm using the S31's. Fairly easy to pop open and flash if you've got some alligator clips and one of those flash programmers (eg https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B075N82CDL/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b...).
One possible attack is someone changing either the encrypt or decrypt source code, either via Github (if they get access to the OP account) to log keystrokes.

Or if someone has hosted it themselves then hack that hosting provider.

Or they could do something like this: https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/24/17275982/myetherwallet-ha...

Phishing is another potential one. Browser extensions, or supply chain attack on packages they use.
Not at all. They're the gatekeepers of the queue for access the inspection area behind the line, where the real bottleneck exists.

The ID check is currently an excuse to put that gatekeeper out front; they could do it as part of the inspection area and not impact a single thing. It could even be easily automated (it effectively is).
The Mythbusters had it right; the difference between science and screwing around is paying attention and writing it down.
I'm begging them to do the same for Python.
He also ended up leaving the company after it was learned he was guilty of a previous felony for identity fraud.
Cool project! This stuff is all possible thanks to the SubtleCrypto API (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/SubtleCrypt...), which became widespread in browsers in the last ~5 years. It's so great we don't have to use weird libraries (some with pretty gnarly side channel leakage) to do cryptography anymore.

It wouldn't be that crazy for the browser to do the encryption part for me, right? Like, what if in the 'save this page' dialog my browser actually did the encryption, and then generated this 'self-decrypting page' for me if I checked a box saying "encrypt with password"? Would be a nice way for regular non-technical people to encrypt things and send them to each other.
Yes, unfortunately. It's one of those things where an ironic meme/movement eventually gets coopted by people who don't pick up on the irony and are sincere.

It's similar to 4chan/TheDonald ironically meme-ing about Trump until it wasn't ironic, and boomers unironically taking shit they read on anonymous message boards as fact.
in some sense because there might be strongly non-local effects... an assignment of color in one part of the graph can have an effect on what colors are allowed in a very different part of the graph. Planarity assures some degree of "locality", you can't arbitrarily connect one point to another point.
I mean...back it up to iCloud, wipe it, update it, restore from iCloud.

It's inconvenient but it's not like you lose any data.
> It is a very long chain of reasoning from there, but this it the thing that most detractors of YEC miss: it is logically sound.

OF course it's not and most counter arguments knock it on it's face at that point. Any idiot can see that just because something looks designed doesn't mean it has a designer.

>[2] An extremely abridged version goes something like this: a cursory inspection of the world around us seems to indicate that it was designed. So let us adopt that as a hypothesis. What would be expect to see? Well, one thing we would expect is that the designer might have provided a manual to go along with his/her/its designed creation. And lo and behold, there is such a manual. Actually, there are many such manuals. Collectively they are referred to as holy texts. The logical rabbit warren branches out from there.

Except all the actually useful manuals were built by man and not provided by a Designer.
Principles only matter when there is a price. It's very easy to be principled when it is free.
Young Earth Creationist. It’s a kind of creationism that posits the world is somewhere around 6,000 to 10,000 years old. That number was arrived at through interpreting scripture as inerrant and correct.

This is in contrast to other forms of creationism which have different interpretations of just how long events that happened in the scripture took place. For instance the days of creation need not be modern 24 hour days.
D has had a BetterC subset of D for a while:

https://dlang.org/spec/betterc.html
The "countries" are supposed to share an edge. An edge, no matter how small, breaks the cross.
I think one major difference is that flat earth-ism requires blatant worldwide conspiracies whereas young earth-ism could be compatible with mere worldwide incompetence.

It's not so hard to accidentally screw up radiocarbon dating of a sample. And it's not unheard of for a whole field of study to royally screw up (e.g. the replication crisis in psychology).

But it's very hard to accidentally screw up "this weather satellite takes a picture of the earth every hour and it clearly shows a sphere". And the flight paths of planes. And and and and ...
A lot of the Oscars about self-promotion, most of all movies about other movies. It's understandable that people in Hollywood would find this very meaningful, what's not so understandable is that the Oscars have lumbered along for so long.

Maybe if they added "best superhero movie" they would get some interest from people.
I agree that each person/organization should look at the security properties of a system and assess their risk against what technology is appropriate. It's entirely reasonable that as a non-targeted person with low value secrets, many of the attacks here don't have ROI for a potential attacker and as a result are neither likely or impactful.

What's important is that other persons and organizations who may be targeted - that they choose what technology to use, knowing what kinds of attacks are possible. For example a human rights activist might very well be targeted by phishing attacks and choose not to store secrets by this method.

I am just trying to enumerate the properties so that persons/organizations can evaluate a match to their use case. I don't believe any system is perfect for all use cases and I don't hold any system to such a standard.
So, the people sucked (he laid off 75% of them), the code sucks ( he’ll be rewriting it), many users suck ( he banned many of them), several features sucked (he’s changing things on the fly)..

So, did he buy Twitter just for the brand, and some users?
Agility does nothing to stop the "ciphertext from the past is broken due to crypto improvements". It's just a means to shorten response time to crypto breaks for _new_ traffic.

This project is plenty agile, upgrading the primitive is very easy as it's not a communication protocol but a data at rest protocol.

> this one doesn't have parameter negotiation and key management

You're thinking in terms of live communication protocols between endpoints. There is no "parameter negotiation" when you are both the sender and receiver of a static ciphertext.

There is no existing remediation for protecting your existing ciphertexts against future cryptanalysis.
Doubt you could do that in a way where you'd attract users at the level of Substack.
I know of a few situations where a company valued in the $billions are paying a fortune to a company valued in the $hundreds of millions for very questionable value.

If the value of the buyer at the top of the food chain crumbles then the value of a whole ecosystem of vendors are hurt too.

Large parts of the VC backed software industry are built on a house of cards.
There is a pitfall with this line of argument in that it is appeal to intuition in a domain in which we have none, because we have no ability to intuit about large numbers.

That doesn't mean that it's wrong (though I myself think that it is); but appeals to "sheer unlikeliness" should be made with care because they can rely on facts such as "the chance for a given star system hosting a planet on which even simple life emerges is 1 in 10^X" hence "oh my 1 in 10^X is a very small number!". Where what matters is e.g. how that number compares to the number of such star systems. Etc etc.

Predictive value aside, the Drake equation at least attempts to quantify.
That's a nice summary. I submitted this video, because i don't have a smartphone and i am pretty young.

Many friends of mine have one, but at the same time there is a sizable number of them which have older phones. I do have a computer, which i use for many hours a day, a pretty hefty computer at that, but i do not feel the need at all, to buy a smartphone.

Anyway the numbers are staggering, billions of older phones are sold every year, which is a little unexpected if you ask me.

Maybe the lack of transparency in Window phones (long live window phones), in Android phones, and Iphones is to blame. Closed source software, pulling software out of app stores on a whim, poor permission design of userspace and apps which enables spyware to thrive contribute to dumbphone revolution.

I am wondering if there are some well thought articles accompanied by some data on the subject.
In one sense it may never, but in another sense it will. In that other sense, you know a mistake to avoid and perhaps can enlighten those around you not to make the same sense. Accidents happen, but you make up for them by making sure those accidents don't happen again or are very likely to be repeated.
The thing is: those four regions can be recoloured (change green by orange).
I'm not that confident in my tool.

That said, I ask myself every day if having my public identity associated to my project, website, etc. Was a good idea.

It certainly helped with jobs in the past, but it's scary to hear stories of devs impersonated by others.
Out of curiosity what home repairs are illegal?
Web Dev for Beginners
Everyone knows it is trivial to host a read-only static website with the traffic of Substack.

It’s the read/write part that gets you.
Well, as "scientists" always claim, the onus is on proponents of the theory to show me observable evidence, not me on the lack of it.
Well he’s the most followed user so it can’t be that. And he’s done a great job of destroying Twitter’s brand so far.

At this point maybe the best explanation for his behavior is it’s all a performance art piece to see how much damage he can do in as short a time as possible. Truly astonishing to watch in real time.
Can you describe "beyond consumerism" in tangible terms or is this a completely ambiguous fantasy?
Or weirdos who like art and vegetable gardens.
Depends on whether your religion involves denying basic facts.

Believing in a god in and of itself doesn't involve denying basic facts, it just involves belief.
The graph has to be planar, which means no to edges intersect (or you can move the edges so that no two edges intersect). The complete graph with 5 or more vertices isn't planar.
It’s a scientific theory, which is a bit more than a theory.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

I also am uncomfortable with some aspects of macro evolution and see some hand waving. But it is the best explanation we have, by some measure.
anyone remember the needles in coin return slot scare growing up? We didn't the internet to check if it was real so I'd always be a little paranoid when getting my coins back.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/slots-of-fun/
If you can code and speak decently well, you already have this.
>1. Live below your means.

Take this seriously. Make sure you invest the surplus cash in an index fund. In time you'll have enough money to not fear a job loss. There's a lot of freedom in that. Keep in mind that most of the stuff you want ends up in the trash or on some shelf collecting dust. So, think twice about what you buy.
Thanks. I find it interesting that you are using root-cause analysis to explain the situation of philosophers who reason in the direction opposite to causality
This can be applied to basically all “cheap” things. There’s a Russian saying: “a cheap person pays twice.”
> Evolution is a theory and is not observable at all

Evolution makes many testable predictions. As a process, it is slow—but it has many observable consequences.
Your example adds more constraints than the original problem, by pre-assigning colors to regions and then asking how to solve for the black region.

In the original problem statement, you could solve by re-assigning your green region to be orange, your red region to be blue, your black region to green, and the white regions to red. Also note that regions that meet at a single point (as in your example) are not considered to be adjacent.
> I don’t know why people can’t stop themselves from fraud

In my experience it's because more minor or gray instances of it that we never see get swept under the rug or ignored, and people get pressured or encouraged into bigger and bigger, more clear-cut fraud until it gets caught.

Survivorship bias works with vice like anything else.
Catholics aren't hardcore Bible literalists.
lots of people play this game....you don't have to. it may ultimately limit your ability to gain a high paying position that lives entirely in the marketing-verse and spouts drivel. but not all of us wants that
I've only done it twice, but both times were with very logical people, engineers.

My conclusion was that we had different base assumptions. They assumed that an omnipotent God existed. With that assumption, it's quite straight forward to build a logical case for evolution.
Yes, sir, and you had to wait 10 years for it! I've only had steel frames myself but when I try out non-steel frames I can't say I dislike them, just that they feel strange.

I'm still trying to understand the talk about over/understeer and how the bottom bracket is involved. Are you saying you put down more weight on the outside pedal on each rotation of the crank as you're going through a turn?

Also, isn't there some wasted energy going into flexing the frame that should go into the road?
Notice they have also given clues to what the password words are. So with brute force, maybe spending a good portion of the bounty on cloud resources, you might crack it that way :-)
What I find interesting in all of this is the number of assumptions that are made on all sides. The assumptions are often not documented or discussed. It's easy to look at religion or YEC to pull out the assumptions. Yet, I've found assumptions show up in all views on the topic.
Well if Disney made the same amount of money as the high school kid, and relied on your song to the same degree, then presumably they would pay the same.

As for what percentage of the derived-work revenue needs to be paid to you, let the deriver pick something that they think is fair (it just can't be $0). It'll be part of the metadata on that work so everybody can see how much of what they're paying is being passed along.

Then we create a culture of amplifying works that are fair to their dependencies. As for those that are doing the bare minimum, we name and shame (and sabotage?).

If it turns out that attributions coverage on 0.00000001% then we can talk about codifying the amounts, but I really think that if we just mandate the transparency, culture will handle the rest.
In America this is unacceptable both because suburban dwellers don't want to have people walking near their homes (invasion of privacy) and because developers would prefer to sell and build on as much land as possible.

There's no money to be made on "public" land and it lowers the value of the land immediately adjacent to it.
More and more DirectX games now work on Linux, and many games have crossplay. In general the trend has been to move away from walled gardens.
A Conversation with Andy Greenberg, Author of Tracers in the Dark
We were able to show the evolutionary behavior on the microscopic scale. And there were multiple experiments doing it so far - your statement on the lack of observability is false.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_...
Before anyone downvotes, remember Darwin himself was terrified by the lack of proof that microevolution led to macroevolution. As were his associates.
You won’t believe it anyway. I can point to SNP mutations leading to macro-scale changes right now - achondroplasia. It’s not worth trying to convince you the obvious implication that concentrating many of these changes in a separate breeding population eventually results in speciation because at this point anybody in denial of evolution is doing so simply on the basis of faith
They speculate and gamble in crypto instead of investing in index funds, for one. Compare the 5-year returns for SPY, DIA, or QQQ vs. Bitcoin. They look for shortcuts to success , thinking they know better, when tried and true methods (like college-to-career + home ownership + index funds) are more boring but more consistently successful. People are always looking for ways to reinvent the wheel. Often this leads to wasted time, wasted money, frustration. Success is not about being a super genius or knowing more, but just avoiding the things which do not work