skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I feel like so many posts that look down on flat-packed/budget furniture overlook the fact that so many people are in a position where "buy it for life" isn't a desired feature.

We're seeing job markets where loyalty doesn't pay and the best way to get a pay bump is to switch employers. We're seeing people live check to check, and so many are renting as opposed to buying.

If I don't have a permanent home, why do I want permanent furniture? When I entered the workforce, my dad gave me a bunch of BIFL-type solid furniture he purchased with my mom before she passed. I ended up eventually selling it all off because it cost me extra to have it moved into and out of any appt that wasn't on ground floor. Often to the point where I could replace it with an IKEA piece for less than the heavy item surcharge.

Or times where I moved into a smaller appt for budget reasons and just didn't have space for some pieces. I once rented a storage locker for a year just to keep furniture I couldn't fit but didn't want to let go because it was solid wood and "had value".

I now use Ikea furniture for everything, and figure if I'm lucky I'll eventually be able to own property/a house and then it'd make sense to own something more durable.
Local Law 18 takes effect in NYC, strictly regulating short-term rentals
You can’t look at aggregate city trends, especially given that it is trendy for builders to focus on high end or luxury.

According to redfin the city I live in (adjacent to Irvine) is in the top 10 in California but that is only because there have been a rapid rise of new developments that are significantly more sq ft than the average house.

The right metric is to check YoY model matches in various neighborhoods to see, but that isn’t reported on.
Sweet, I've been waiting for this announcement for some time now, as it's been pretty easy to use.

I was able to build, "sign up", deploy and view an astro app within about 3 minutes at the time. The only barriers I ran into (me being cute trying to break things) are documented on the link provided (50 MB max file size). I had minimal/no performance issues (even when being cruel) to the backend and it served up assets happily. Routing and updating the app (with updates reflected immediately) worked without any issues for me at the time.

I haven't tried the GHA yet (I was mainly doing it off my local machine), but looks like it'll be a pretty slick end-to-end flow for frontend apps with a simple git push.

Note: I used to work alongside one of the creators of this (and other pico.sh projects) and love seeing their stuff on HN
what does the >200k but in your rhetorical question serve, as a purpose?

This is rhetorical ofc because I have interpreted to be a baseless attack on the tech laborforce because of their above mean income.
I'm a lot like you, I started out that way. Over time I added 4 good developers to my team and now have a steady flow of almost steady income.
I've seen a youtube video of someone using this with the food channel to order a dominoes pizza. (they're the only one added right now, because they have the simplest ordering API)

A very novel concept, I hope it can be expanded.
You're totally right. I'm trying to make a moral argument, I think if it were unfeasible for an individual to make something (e.g. modern CPU) then you could make an argument for producers limiting them on the basis that it would effectively prevent anyone from doing the banned thing. The fact that it's roughly as easy to reflash an IoT device with custom firmware as it is to make an antenna that produces noise in a forbidden frequency means that you are adding a technical measure to prevent just some of that illegal action and not stopping a determined hacker.

I'm not claiming it wouldn't be an overall social good, but other areas of law and regulation don't seem to function like this (with notable exceptions like photocopying banknotes).
Notepad++ maybe?
Since your skepticism of regulation seems broad, it seems unfair to cabin examples to just the FCC.

Why not look at the food quality changes between 1905 and today? Those have largely been won on the back of serious regulation through the FDA (and it's predecessor), as well as labeling requirements. Both of those regulations have had significant improvements in the lives of consumers.

Honestly, I have a very hard time seeing a downside to regulation that solely mandates a more transparent marketplace. The free market only actually works when an effective marketplace is possible, and that requires transparency. Without transparency, "free markets" are less likely to produce efficient outcomes.
That's hilarious. I wonder what the license model is for the crack that they used.
Does RAZOR1911 have a legal way to have a share of revenue since they are using his hard work?
jetbrains products. I think they've improved their situation, but it's still a little quirky
With all due respect, I think the market should address this. Like UL Approval from Underwriters Laboratories, players in the market can submit their products to an organization that vets their security and sets standards about updates, product lifetimes, security incident response time commitments etc to obtain their seal of approval. Perhaps the seal has grade levels to indicate the vendor's commitment to security. The highest grades indicate regular audits of vendor practices. And a website where approval status (and possible revocation) can be looked up.

This simultaneously enables innovation by small players while providing a pathway for bigger players to put a meaningful trust signal on their packaging and advertising.
I'd be really happy with products having to be labeled with:

1. Final date the manufacturer will provide firmware updates & security updates
2. If the manufacturer will support open source alternative firmware & security updates.
3. If there are any subscription fees (and how much) to get firmware updates & security updates.

Issue #1 is a big deal: I've purchased equipment, new in the box, after the mfg had discontinued support. I've also ran into issues with devices where updates required a subscription. I'd love a little disclosure.
A tool for checking the security hardening options of the Linux kernel
The overhead is the point of shooting on film these days. Each shot is costly and time-consuming, so you think about what you are doing and the shots that make it to a print are your well-considered best ones. Scanning doesn't even makes sense in this mindset.

When I used to be into photography I shot B&W film and did all my own processing and prints. Never scanned anything (of course, scanners didn't exist in those days, at least not in the consumer market).

I started with a K-1000 also, there's something wonderful about its simplicity. Even though the viewfinder is dim and the action is slow by today's standards, you are in total control of aperture, focus, and shutter speed.

I moved up to a slightly more automated Ricoh body that accepted all my Pentax lenses, but started lacking the time to spend on this hobby and eventually just stopped. The camera and lenses still work some 30+ years later, but are sitting on a shelf.

I never got into digital photography. I found it entirely unrewarding. I have maybe a dozen photos on my phone and they are just used as sort of visual notes of things I need for a short while.
Member-only story, fyi
The price of a good is not a constant. It doesn't matter whether it's land, gold, stocks, rent, or trading cards. Prices change. Buyers are never entitled to the "previous fair market value" of anything.
Naomi Klein's “Doppelganger”
They’re trolling because that’s one of the few ways a human being that’s not upper class can get attention in the Brazilian cacophony.
I had the opposite reaction. I already know physics, but I want to learn Haskell.
trump apologia never ends
It used to be worth it, maybe in the early to mid 10s when the pros switched to digital and film stock was dirt cheap. But now a single roll of Portra is like $25 and even a mediocre rangefinder is $400. Nowadays, when I see someone shooting film -- I think hipster with more money than sense.

The benefit now is that nice digital DSLRs and their lenses are cheap. You can pick up a nice used a6000 with kit lens for less than the total out of pocket cost of 100 film photographs.
" Article 72 of the Law on Personal Status allows judges to determine if it is permissible for a married woman to leave the house and to work. Unlike the case of children of Emirati fathers, Emirati citizenship is not transmitted automatically to the children of Emirati women."

"Some of the women's rights under the Personal Status Law require the consent of a male guardian, who is often the husband or a male family member."

"Women in UAE can be victims of flogging. Flogging and stoning are legal judicial punishments in the UAE because of the Sharia courts. Flogging is used in UAE as a punishment for several criminal offences, such as adultery, premarital sex, and prostitution."

"Emirati women must receive permission from male guardian to remarry. This requirement is derived from Sharia, and has been considered a federal law since 2005. In all emirates, it is illegal for Muslim women to marry non-Muslims. In the UAE, a marriage union between a Muslim woman and non-Muslim man is punishable by law, since it is considered a form of fornication".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_the_United_Arab_Emira...

sorry truth it's brutal out there, behind those concrete jungle. ME is not what it's look from outside.
This site feels like a terrible joke

Do really "serious" people use this?
Modified or not, legally R.S. Games owns it anyway.
At this point in life, I've moved on to a new field altogether, but some of the ideas you are sharing above are exactly the types of models I experimented with.
One thing I've noticed more now that I read HN more than other places...

Software people sure like to talk/write a lot of about their business. Like, a lot.

I'm a mechanical/aerospace engineer, and I've done some short term consulting for startups (but now mostly retired).

There is verrry little online in the form of blog posts like this mulling over how people work in that type of engineering (especially in the higher-end of the field, like what happens in automotive and military/commercial aerospace- it's all very closed-doors). Especially less in the methods/metas of the field and the business surrounding it.

But software people? HN is flooded everyday with long form exposition just like this blog post. And it's honestly been pretty eye opening reading how much people pontificate in this area. Like, goddamn. I'm starting to think people talk about their ways of work more hours of the day than they actually.... you know... work.

<< Just an observation; don't kill me. >>
I'm not talking about self-hosting, i'm just saying that most people will have their source already on some stable location (typically a hosted forge). I'm not so sure why crates.io should be any different than the typical source host: i don't trust you, so i'll run my own thing, but now people have to trust me and we're back at square one.

All in all your points are mostly valid (i don't fully understand all your arguments about versions as integrity should be handled by git) but again referring to my first message, they are best addressed by a community repository: these kind of guarantees can only be addressed by a trusted entity and there no reason on the world everybody writing rust should be trusting the same entity (with such a lightweight management). It can only fail in some ways.
I think the difference is following a set story vs making your own story. I prefer the latter...
A mantra I usually follow is "If you're putting something under 'utility'/'utilities'/similar names, you're cheating on your design and you're only putting it there because you can't figure out a better place, think longer/harder.". Applies equally for testing code :)
> An informed market avoids lemons.

Has that been true in practice? I can think of plenty of horrible products, in IT, on the market. In terms of security (including privacy), the market has done nothing for IT consumers. And what about the people who already bought the lemons, before the market learned of it? Also, what if the lemon doesn't affect me but affects others (such as through DDoS)?

I prefer to keep it as simple as possible, but no simpler.
It's best to shy away from explicitly including things like "2 minor revisions". Who determines if the change is minor or not? The client will always assume minimal effort is required. If the change is in fact minor, then just implement it.

If the change is significant, then provide a price for its implementation.

Specifying that minor revisions are included in the agreement provides too much ambiguity.
To add some nuance to what I'm saying:

I've found its accurate for Meta / Microsoft / Google / Apple / Netflix / Amazon. Having worked at Apple for half a decade, it seemed (mostly) accurate.

I have found it less accurate for other companies that are big and desirable but not nearly as sought after to work for in the last decade. For startups or smaller companies, its not the best data point

Don't know where I'd put GitHub, maybe the signal to noise ratio is closer to one of the big companies than not, however my current employer has a Blind channel and its not very accurate to my experience
“The dataset contained measures of young adolescents ages nine to 13 and how many years they had spent reading for pleasure during their early childhood. It also included data on their cognitive, mental health and brain health.

About half of the group of adolescents starting reading early in childhood, whereas the other, approximately half, had never read in early childhood, or had begun reading late on.

We discovered that reading for pleasure in early childhood was linked with better scores on comprehensive cognition assessments and better educational attainment in young adolescence.”

Seems like classic correlation not causation
I enjoy LAT. Keeps the fire alive in the relationship with the LTR gf. And gives me enough space and freedom, to not feel trapped.
Why the Japanese PC Failed [video]
Governments know that the police sometimes go rogue and don't care. It can be cleaned up when they do.

Tech firms also know that programmers can make mistakes whilst implementing complex cryptography, or even be corrupted, yet this is not itself an argument against implementing cryptography!

To repeat once again, we're not debating the ethics of E2E encryption here. Please don't waste time trying to convince me that E2E is encryption is a good idea, because (if it was real and worked) I'd agree with you! But your argument is a Type 1 No by the scheme presented in the article. It is a "we'd really rather not" social argument.

The problem our industry has is typified by the article. Too many tech people argue that giving police access to WhatsApp encryption is actually a Type 3 "it can't be done for fundamental physical reasons so it doesn't matter who demands it" problem, but that isn't true. Remember that governments don't care about E2E encryption whatsoever in any way. They would much rather ban it as a source of unnecessary problems. If tech firms claim they can't turn it off completely, they're obviously lying and that will just enrage governments. If tech firms claim they can't keep it whilst providing targeted access, governments don't care about that either. After all, email isn't end-to-end encrypted, nor is SMS, nor are normal phone calls, nor are letters. Why should WhatsApp be any different?

In reality it actually is possible to design a system that stops people with only server-side access to WhatsApp reading messages, whilst still breaking if the clients are compromised, and which allows police to have targeted levels of access without any risk of universal master key leaks. There are lots of ways to do that. You can use secure enclaves, zero knowledge proofs, or more exotic algorithms. But it's also not really relevant to the point I'm making, which is about the No Type being presented to governments. There was surely a better example that could have been chosen for a Type 3 No.
Bogus CVE Follow-Ups
The ones I saw seemed fine? You fill out a paper ballot, and you submit it to the worker at the end who scans it and drops the ballot in the box in one motion.

You have a paper trail, it anonymous, and it's pretty easy to understand.

I guess if you modified the firmware on the scanner to disclose the vote counters continuously, and the worker at the end knew me by sight (the worker I showed my I'd to is on the other end of the room) you could find my vote. But you could also hide a camera in the booth, which is easier.
I only use programs for which I've found a workaround due to the pain, so I can't list the ones that I don't have a workaround for. TBF two of the programs (emacs tramp and git-annex) I use regularly actually mostly respect ssh_config by default, but they override the ControlMaster by default (to do their own connection muxing) which requires me to do an extra authentication step.
Static Ownership Checks for C
Cake is a C23 Front End http://thradams.com/cake/index.html that is implementing static ownership checks.

Cake source itself is already using this feature that can be used and disabled with few macros.

The link is a tour explaining the concepts and usage of this feature.
Hey! Welcome back, Marco (he was a pretty active HN'er back in the day).
This makes sense to me. The definition is slightly awkward, but awkward in a way that preserves the FCC's ability to regulate the issue at all. If you clean up the definition, you can get to a more coherent definition of IoT device, but without the FCC's ability to regulate the devices.

I think the broader definition would probably just fall back to the FTC, and as far as consumer protection goes I think they've been asleep at the switch for decades.
Some information about the caste according to the Hindu American Foundation a few years back:

>In 2010, HAF issued a report titled "Hinduism: Not Cast in Caste" alleging that Christian missionaries were able to push their proselytizing agenda only because of the prevalence of caste discrimination in India; it went to argue that caste cannot be considered to be an intrinsic definitional aspect of Hinduism—due to a lack of theological sanction in its most sacred texts—and urged for reforms led by Hindus themselves. This led to a flutter in conservative Hindu circles of India and the next year, HAF toned down their report; they cautioned against the trend of passing resolutions against caste discrimination adopted by various global organizations and held caste to be an internal affair of a sovereign India. HAF has since portrayed castes as occupational guilds which had brought stability to premodern India before being reified under British colonialism; it has vehemently opposed drawing parallels between caste-discrimination and racism, and even any depiction of the caste-system as a rigid birth-determined pyramid of hierarchy.

They started off fighting against the caste system, until the elites in India told them no. Ever since, they've minimized the impact the caste system had and still has -- not just in India.
What if you're a journalist who assists someone looking for help to access/exfiltrate documents they're not supposed to be handling or sharing externally? Or a journalist privately pushing people to commit crimes and assisting them in ways to share those documents with you? Doesn't that then make you a conspirator to a crime?

There's a big difference between someone uploading a collection of secret files to a website you run and actively communicating with someone trying to get them to commit crimes on your behalf, or knowingly helping others commit crimes.

I'm not arguing Assange did or did not do those things, I don't know. I'm just saying if he did those things, he did commit a crime separate from just publishing documents the government would prefer the public to not see (which according to New York Times Co. vs United States it is not a crime).
Have you ever used contract law in that manner? Did you call up Apple and negotiate a contract for your new iPhone, imposing requirements on them?

Give it a try and report back.
In one case, you bill for each hour you work; in another, you bill for any day in which you did work.
Cracking was a 90s term for pirating software
Circling back to this story after 11 days, your Mondo link stirred up all sorts of stuff from my life in that era, I was 23 in 1995... I had no idea there was even a "Macintosh NY Music Festival" (from one of the awesome ads) lol wow. I was in California at the time and in the USAF, so I wouldn't have been able to make it, anyway, but was always a huge Apple fan, didn't realize they ran a music festival... RIP CBGB
They should have go with "terrafork"...
Thank you for these thoughtful points. Some relevant responses from other threads:

From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37394188 :

I think you're right that it would be difficult for the FCC to precisely define exactly when security updates are required. This is a problem in law generally, one that is usually resolved by imposing a reasonableness standard. Maybe here, a vulnerability needs to be patched if it might reasonably be expected to allow an attacker to take control of a device, or to do so when combined with other known or unknown vulnerabilities. Or maybe a different standard. Then when enforcement/lawsuits come around, the judge/jury/regulator has to evaluate the reasonableness of the manufacturer's actions in light of that standard. We'd love to see commentary on the record as to what the right legal standard might be.

From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37394793 :

Agreed. Building an automatic firmware update system from scratch would be burdensome for many IoT makers, but as it becomes necessary or encouraged, we would expect the market to provide a packaged solution/framework that manufacturers could fold into their products. It would be really helpful have to discussion of this on the record. How generalizable do you think such a solution could be? We are aware of the Uptane project, an OTA firmware update framework being jointly worked on by several car manufacturers, but would love to hear more about the feasibility of a solution for IoT devices generally, or particular classes of IoT devices.

From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37393926 :

[...] companies wanting to put a label on their product would probably want to extract similar guarantees up their supply chain. Especially with a voluntary program like the one the FCC is proposing, good practices won't become the norm across the market overnight. But maybe, at the very least, the segment of product and component makers that take security seriously will begin to grow. I encourage you to share your thoughts in an official comment.
They are all OK to use, and each provider has pros and cons, depending on the use case.

Hetzner is the cheapest; however, your data is stored in Germany or Finland. They have free bandwidth, but you are limited to 10 connections at a time.

Backblaze B2 has 4 regions across the globe, storage is $5/mo, there is no minimun retention time, but does have a cost for API Calls(transactions), and in addition charges for egress data(downloads), so your $5/TB is a variable factor, and if you use your data, you may not achieve $5/TB, the cost will grow depending on the use case(there are free levels of transactions and egress)

Wasabi is $7/TB and has 13 regions across the globe, with free egress and no api charges. It does have 90-day minimum storage charge, which means you are billed for every object for 90 days regardless of if you delete it before 90 days. In addition, the free egress has limits to prevent system abuse. There is a 30-day deleted storage charge available if you purchase in bulk with their RCS(reserved capacity) storage plan. It's good if you want to store a lot of data that does not need deletion.

I have accounts with all 3 of these for different use cases.