skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> After months of calls to Apple customer support and letters to the company (...), he said he finally reached a representative who was willing to do more. Once Mr. Allen answered additional verification questions, Apple disabled the recovery key, he said. (...). Mr. Allen said he uses some Apple business services, which might explain why he was able to recover his account.

As someone whose brother lost years of his children's videos when thieves locked him out of his iCloud account [1] this part confirms two things. First, it gives me hope that we might one day recover the account, seeing as the data is not cryptographically locked. And second, it confirms that the reason we couldn't get the access back is not because Apple can't do it, but rather because they don't care.

If you have an iPhone, user gkiely shared this tip on how to further protect your account: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33602627

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34406619
I am aware how attestation works and what problem it addresses. But I strongly believe the power imbalance it creates outweighs the benefits.

Especially with bullshit like CF using it as a captcha substitute.
https://blog.cloudflare.com/introducing-cryptographic-attest...
Because there's a material difference between the NSA snooping on your metadata, and your local constabulary having video feeds of every corner of your village. Abuses by the NSA are bigger picture things that mostly aren't seen to affect everyday Americans. Abuses by the local constabulary are much more real to the community, like domestic abuse.

Of course, I think a large number of Americans don't have direct exposure to the UK system, and have only seen it misused in popular media, eg Hot Fuzz.
2023 Layoff Tracker
Maybe, you would also need to provide enough proof that this data refers to you, so apple could ask about proving ownership of the account.
Seems like another reason not to use yubikeys, especially with the push for Fido. The cynical part of me assumes going public means they'll need to generate more income for investors. Fancy a subscription service to keep you yubikeys working?
Multiple companies in China report GWh scale production lines close to opening.
> You have to re-architect things so that the UI is optimistic, commits to a local database and that local database is synced up to the server when you come online.

Isn't that exactly what the article argues for though?

> This kind of idea would move you away from a product full of API calls to one based on data synchronization.
If you want another perspective I would recommend this documentary (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pD_9Ym6k70) about Pete Gustin, a blind voice actor whose voice you probably recognize... and who also surfs. https://www.youtube.com/c/BlindSurfer
Good UX is very subjective though. I mean for me the way Emacs looks by default and how it allows me to customize it the way I see fit is good UX. Others don't see it as good UX.

Can I customize the status bar to include my contextual information with a single line of code in VS Code? Perhaps not. So VS Code has bad UX for my needs. But many consider VS Code to have good UX.
This is not a matter of going public, but I note that when MS bought Github, there was a lot of concern over whether that would degrade the service's customer-friendliness. So far, that doesn't seem to have happened? You don't need a MS365 identity to set up a github account, for example.

Also not going public, but Fastmail was bought by Opera in 2009 I think but then bought themselves back out again, and they've continued to offer excellent customer service (including yubikey support of which they were an early adopter) all the time.

So I'd say there's precedent for companies staying customer-focused under capitalism if the stars align: it has to be a place where (1) staying customer-focused is a clear net positive for the domain they're working in, even from a revenue perspective and (2) the people running the company understand this.

I imagine this is much more the case for companies where the customers are specialists / power users (think: developers) or other businesses, rather than the general public. I hope that means yubico of all places is lower risk. Although I consider them one of the best if not the best in the market, were they to go under, there are alternatives (google's own titan keys are ok replacements for the end user, though obviously they don't have the yubico back-end infrastructure). FIDO/U2F etc. are standards and come with certifications, so I'd hope there's only limited room for maneuvre for any new yubico owners to mess up, and a sufficient threat of losing their business that they are not incentivised to try anything too shady.
we used the seleny script
Learning to Compress Prompts with Gist Tokens
I don't think it's irrational, it rarely improves the service
It’s the same authors as well. This is weird.
Epidemiologist reviews clinical evidence for anti-colic baby bottle claims
Interesting that both | and ^ were supported, but | took over and ^ is still unused by the shell.

I wonder if ^ was deprecated because of the likelihood it'd be commonly used at the start of a regexp for grep, but | used to provide alternatives in a regexp was probably much less frequently used and so having to quote is was less of a problem than for ^.

Also interesting that the v3 format had both input and output filters, which is just semantic repositioning of the commands.
I was thinking that draft of the master plan ... you can't really just write it up this clear and easy.

Overall, I don't think a 95% auto pilot GPT model would provide more efficiency than a 80% one.
job for life
It doesn’t in order to reset the PW on your account with a device you need to re-confirm the passcode.
> In February, we reported that thieves, often in and around bars at night, watch iPhone owners tap in their passcodes, then steal the targets’ phones. With this short four- or six-digit string, criminals can change the Apple account password and rack up thousands of dollars in charges using Apple Pay and financial apps.
[…]

> Apple introduced the optional recovery key in 2020 to protect users from online hackers.
[…]

> iPhone thieves with your passcode can flip on the recovery key and lock you out. And if you already have the recovery key enabled, they can easily generate a new one, which also locks you out.
[…]

> So long as you can access your iPhone, you can add or reset a recovery key without any extra credentials. Apple says this is a convenience measure. However, it also gives thieves easier access.

Uff! Security vs convenience is a difficult problem, but only protecting against remote/online hacking is a massive oversight! One shouldn’t underestimate the incentives for thiefs stealing your passcode and device in real life.
Writing a web scraper with ChatGPT: is it something useful?
I would certainly hope so.

But this sounds like a very clever way around the whole “Apple can’t be bothered to care” problem.
Literally been like this for over 15 years, and people were sent to jail from 2009 onwards because of it

https://www.theregister.com/2009/11/24/ripa_jfl
Those look very much as an exception to the rule
So what? It's not like that money is lost. It ends all back in the economy because people spend their wages.
I recently reevaluated my approach to identity & recovery across all the services I rely on and it’s a mess.

Apple and Google both provide sensible security settings but you can only guess how recovery might work if you are locked out of your account from their docs.
Even with their advanced security programs (requiring a hardware token) I’m not entirely sure that I’m not defeating the whole purpose of these measures by putting a mobile number in my account that can be sim swapped.
On the other hand I’m also not entirely sure if I could recover access from what I think I’d need to provide to prove my identity (recovery codes, trusted contacts, …)

I get why they might not want to lay out the whole process and every heuristic they use, but it’s not really reassuring.
My argument is that although robots.txt is a machine-readable way of asserting reservation of use, it's not the only machine-readable way, and the law does not seem to place a burden on the rights-holder to choose a particular 'machine-readable format'.

While a court would likely conclude that a watermark on an image is not 'machine-readable' (I say likely—OCR technology would however make it possible that a court could find that a watermark is machine readable), I would say that because the law does not require a specific method, I think it might be found that a copyright notice in the footer, or in an image caption, is indeed 'machine-readable'.

On balance, I agree that there's a lot of things we are woefully underprepared for coming up in the very near future on using tools in this way to generate art. The answer is not simply to try and lock up all the art away from the robots—but I don't know what the answer actually is.
The Thundering Herd Problem
I believe they have to shoulder surf first because the passcode is asked again when they trigger the password change.

I also think Android has a similar issue.
I think it might be worth adding to this some discussion of how the load balancer itself handles the load, and the related fact that _within_ some backends, the responsibility for load-balancing falls on rich clients that maintain knowledge of the server sets to which they can route requests.
Someday, in the far, far 90s, we had LAN. And everything worked.

Now, you need 5Mbit speeds just to collaborate. Funny how the tech "progressed".
Cold War relevance, maybe?
The reproduction of life can never be meaningful by itself, in part because a single life is already countless moments and the problem is the same.

I think what you perhaps want to point at is the opposite: the fact that _a_ life is finite and therefore things worth doing/things that are meaningful look beyond that - and the wider they look the more meaningful they can be.
France and Belgium also have similar laws backed by imprisonment
The point is to bridge online and offline and make apps more robust

If it works locally and there's no need for syncing or communication in the first place then yeah, problem solved!
Not talking about company being more successful but better to the actual customers. Google isn't exactly a good example here

Also Microsoft went public almost 4 decades ago, apple went public over 4 decades ago, the landscape looked a bit different there.
Higher order functions! -- in Prolog! oh my.

Prolog has predicates, not functions. (It has uninterpreted function symbols -- aka functors in this context.) It's based on first-order logic, i.e., it has nothing higher order in it, if you want to take it (formally) seriously. But of course there is `call/1` and so forth, which are just hacks... err, "non declarative".

There are some interesting higher-order logic programming languages, e.g. Mercury. I like the approach taken by HiLog [1] as it struck me as (semantically) honest and simple. I don't know if it's usable.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiLog
How would that model work considering the key is a piece of hardware, built to implement an open standard (at least for the U2F mode)? There's no "key phone home" phase in U2F.

Also, though I would miss yubikeys if they went under like this, in practice I could switch to google titan or something else and it wouldn't be the end of the world.
> How then would one leverage 9p filesystems to solve the containerization problem?

Well, there's:

https://wiki.qemu.org/Documentation/9psetup

Then again, there's also an alternative citing overhead with 9p being a network protocol:

https://virtio-fs.gitlab.io/
A nice, solid, memorable rule, which works all the time. Just like "I before E except after C".

Except when weird species seize their feisty foreign neighbours.
The other add-ons, changes and additions probably play a role, too.

On a personal note this is one of the things I disliked about emacs, too: its configs are non-deterministic :) You find a nice config somewhere, or do the same changes,... and your emacs still looks and behaves differently.
> Is it? It performs slower than e.g. Fastify. Don't see how that's doing well.

It's such a marginal difference when you consider real-life applications built with either express or Fastify though. Seldom is the actual bottleneck which HTTP library you use (unless you're at a really, really, really big scale), and more about how you structure your code, database and general architecture. I can count on one hand the number of times I've had to care deeply about the HTTP stack in order to optimize something, while I've probably had to optimize 100s of web products over the years, all done without touching the HTTP parts at all.

> It doesn't. That's the whole point. Software is always evolving and I doubt it's even close to complete. There hasn't been meaningful updates to Express in a long time. Why do people use it and/or promote it as a standard?

How to handle HTTP requests kind of doesn't. HTTP 1.1 continues to work, and will continue to be sufficient for at least 90% of all the use cases on the web for a long time.

I know that the JS community generally suffers from "If it hasn't been updated in the last year, it's probably broken and not modern enough" syndrome, but some software actually end up being "finished" and good enough for the task at hand. What improvements could you actually add to express without breaking the API interface that millions of applications depend on? Sometimes stability is wanted and needed, and that's how you get mature software. Who wants to rewrite their application and architecture every time some library you happen to use decides to "improve" it?
Thanks I'm really glad you likes it:)
> The images aren’t being copied into the model.

Except where they kind of are.

Where it gets fiddly is if the model is capable of spitting out close reproductions of images from its training set. That's been demonstrated on some models. I don't have a particularly good intuition as to which way this would go, but I can see someone making an argument that copying the model is therefore copying all the training set images it could be convinced to make a reproduction of. That's unlikely to be everything in the training set, but by the same token I don't know how you could determine how much of the training set can be reproduced that way.
I have a question, although it's not about this product in particular.

I started building web apps before Auth0, Okta and friends arrived on the scene so I never considered until recently having someone else manage my authentication concerns. Identity is very important in most web applications so I was wondering what value a CTO gets from allowing someone else to manage it.

For example, I would be concerned about prices suddenly being increased or what happens if the business we relied on failed, lost accreditations, or suffered a serious security incident. Presumably there isn't a migration workflow away from these products, save for asking your customers to perform a manual action.

While clearly these services are very useful and popular, I just can't shake the feeling that it could be a very good way to get started, but a long term strategic mistake.

I was wondering if anyone from Kinde or with experience using these services long-term has any thoughts on this?
Again, wait until Rust gets 40 years of history deployments, distributed from the tiny 8 CPU, to HPC workloads and FPGAs, or stuff running on Mars.

I doubt very much that Rust editions and backwards compatibility history will be able to survive 40 years with such diverse use cases, without introducing accidental complexity and corner cases along the way.

This assuming that we can still use Rust and not Crab , as if Rust also doesn't have its own show of politics.
When you do not rely on ACID for data consistency, you need to architect for eventual consistency. For example CRDT on collaborative editing a text document.
There are various tax breaks for R&D spending - so companies try and classify lots of things that aren't R&D as R&D.

There's been a bit of stink recently in the UK around R&D tax credits and how companies have been taking the tax man for a bit of a ride.
>You don't need any strategic hiring coordinating coordinators for higher-education.

Actually, you do!
That depends on how you do type checking and more specifically type inference. Mypy infers types of local variables but not function boundaries as it expects you to annotate function arguments and return values.

In mypy a variable taking values of two types is an error (unless explicitly annotated) which means you can assume the type from the first assignment statement and then use that assumption every other time the variable is used/assigned. In pylint it allows variables to take multiple types and only emits errors when an operation is invalid against one of the types. E.g. `x[0]` is valid for lists and tuples so you could assign it a list or a tuple depending on some condition.

The number of possibilities it considers quickly multiplies. Eg if your function is of the form `if blue_condition: x = blue_action(x)` that's a doubling of the possibilities and ten flags -> 1024 possibilities. (pylint has some heuristics on when to give up.)

The advantage of pylint is that it doesn't require your code to fit a certain style. But nowadays people have type annotations and they prefer to use them even if it means changing their code style a bit here and there.

Other type inferers with different approaches are pyright, Jedi, Pyre, pytype etc with different tradeoffs.
the background makes it badly readable on phones too
Copying the image into your brain isn't what's material here. It's copying it into your browser over the network.
But why do the iPhone users tap in their passcodes in the first place when there is faceID and touchID available?
Too bad you can't use LAN to work from home
IMHO, the crazy part is that it is possible to create a new Recovery Key with just the iPhone passcode (and the iPhone). So basically, the iPhone passcode is mightier than the Recovery Key. The only purpose of the Recovery Key is to protect against SIM swapping attacks. I didn't know this.

So an attacker with the iPhone passcode can lock you out of your Apple account on all devices, even if they don't have your Apple ID password or your Recovery Key. Basically, the iPhone passcode is your only defense if you lose your iPhone. I had always assumed the Apple account password would be needed, and that the passcode is not as important as it is so common for it to be only four or six digits.

I'm going to go setup a stronger passcode now.
Citations? I've looked at it, being maintainer of several fast and slow VM's by myself.

I don't see careful optimizations, it's rather sloppy. More like perl and python, unlike lua, php or v8.
Yes actually it isn't illegal to make mistakes on filing your taxes. That's why you can amend them.

Deliberately avoiding paying tax is illegal. Apple didn't avoid paying tax. They just reported where the local tax should go incorrectly.

The State then took Apples word and gave too much to the city.

State inefficiency allows this. If existing laws haven't been changed to effect this thenthe State was negligent in failing to audit shit for decades.
I've encountered it agreeing I am correct then proceeding to serve the same code, or even worse, regressing and losing corrections made earlier. The longer you "talk" to it in a conversation, the worse the output becomes. It can feel like you're getting somewhere, but you're usually not.

It's largely a waste of time, anybody who knows what they're doing will just do it properly. Anybody who doesn't know what they're doing will waste their time and likely never learn how to do things correctly, and their Dunning-Kruger complex will be in full-effect.
The section starts with

> In general

> In the case of a taxpayer’s specified research or experimental expenditures for any taxable year—

Note specified.

Then the special rule says

> For purposes of this section, any amount paid or incurred in connection with the development of any software shall be treated as a research or experimental expenditure.

So the section says its purpose is to govern specified R&E expenditure. And the special rule regarding software is caveated to make it clear that it is subject to the general purpose of the section.

To your analogy, if I pay an employee to build a machine rather than buy a machine, that’s opex not capex. I don't amortize the labor cost of the machine out over 5 years and pay taxes on the 80% of the employees salary that now doesn’t count as an expense because they made a machine. I also don't get to add the value of the machine as an asset and record losses as it depreciates over the years, either.
This fucking article.

CF, WHICH IS THE FUCKING SOURCE OF THIS PROBLEM, complains about the problem
It does. One example of incorrect TF got produced is splitting the dynamo table, and it's gsi into two distinct resources
Federal court strikes down a California city’s natural gas ban
Now you need 5Mbit speeds so that your Windows' boot time is not slowed down.
For many millennia CGI has had difficulty creating anything that looked real.

But each advance has been an opportunity to unnerve people as they react to how much more real something looks, but still isn’t real.

I think the uncanny valley is now getting trained out of us.

We are all getting used to a continuum of real to stylistically unreal, with no more unexplored valley.

Except for the weird mistakes. Those will likely remain weird to us since most of us don’t want to immerse ourselves in worlds of uncountable fingers and third arms for long enough for that to start feeling normal.
There’s nothing in the regulation that says the UX has to be bad; quite the contrary!¹ That’s the point: the harder a service goes out of their way to make the data collection UX bad—which is harder than making it simple—the less they care about you.

In addition, legitimate cookies to provide a service don’t require consent.²

If you’re annoyed at the EU instead of the websites, you’ve played right into the hands of the people wanting your data for illegitimate purposes. Every time you agree to a bad cookie banner you validate their shady practices and make the web worse for everyone, including yourself.

¹ https://noyb.eu/en/where-did-all-reject-buttons-come

² https://wikis.ec.europa.eu/display/WEBGUIDE/04.+Cookies+and+...
Wow pretty cool.
I thought you couldn't automatically set an app as full screen without a prompt?
How did you do that?
Alexa, write me a witty response mentioning IP over Avian Carriers.
I can't wait for C++64.

But "just wait until Rust will repeat C++'s mistakes" is just pure speculation. Language evolution doesn't have to make the language worse. Java, JS, C#, or Ada are pretty old now, and have been doing fine. Rust is well prepared for a 40-year lifespan with its edition system.