skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
On July 2013, Robert X. Cringely wrote an article on a Def Con crackers' conference that took place in Las Vegas.

https://www.cringely.com/2013/07/30/the-origins-of-defcon/

The events in that article took place in 1993. Read the whole article, but here's the best bit.

Hotel security had mistakenly kicked out attendees at that conference, so they decided to get revenge by hacking their system. The is from Cringely:

***

The meeting reconvened at 9 or 10 with the topic suddenly changed to Revenge on the Sands. Gail Thackeray, then a U. S. Attorney from Arizona who at that moment had approximately half the room under indictment, rose to offer her services representing the kids against the hotel management.

Thackeray had been invited to speak by the very people she wanted to put in jail. I told you this was surreal.

Adult assistance might be nice, but a potentially more satisfying alternative was offered by a group that had breached the hotel phone system, gained access to the computer network, obtained root level access to the VAX minicomputer that ran the Sands casino, and were ready at any moment to shut the sucker down. It came to a vote: accept Thackeray’s offer of assistance or shut down the casino.

There was no real contest: they voted to nuke the casino. Not one to be a party pooper, I voted with the majority.

Gail Thackeray, feeling her lawyer’s oats, was perfectly willing to be a party pooper, though. She explained with remarkable patience that opting en masse to commit a felony was a move that we might just want to reconsider, especially given the three strikes implications for some of the older participants.

We could accept her help or accept a date with the FBI that afternoon. The Sands (now the Venetian), which was ironically owned by the same folks who used to run Comdex, never knew how close it came to being dark.

It was a thrilling moment like you’d never see today. Everyone who was in that room shares a pirates’ bond. And though I can’t defend what we almost did, I don’t regret it.

And like the others, I wish Gail Thackeray had stayed in Arizona and we’d shut the sucker down.
What are you basing this on other than Hollywood movies? Was an example made of the Caesars Palace hackers?
I'd recommend trying to make a game "from scratch", using only libraries, instead of an "engine", if you haven't done it before, and have only used fully-featured game engines. it's good to learn how to solve problems using structs and pointers and memory, instead of thinking only in high-level primitives like Entities and Components and Prefabs and Scenes and Nodes. not only will you level up your knowledge of how computers work, but you might be surprised at how much easier it can be to structure your code and reason about it.

spend a weekend making a simple 2D platformer with something like C and SDL. include support for multiple levels, a title screen, and maybe a pause screen. if you've never done this before, you might be shocked at how easy it is.

you don't need a scene graph. you don't need a component system. you don't need garbage collection. if you're used to having all of these things by default, it's the only paradigm you'll ever know how to work within.

once you've done this, feel free to return to using full-featured engines if you wish—but you may start to see the value in doing more things yourself, instead of trying to fit your ideas into complex, overly-generic, overengineered systems and abstractions you yourself didn't design.

this is all assuming, of course, that your goal is, at least in part, to be able to honestly call yourself a "game developer" in general, as opposed to merely an expert user of a specific piece of software. if instead your goal is to just make something you want to make, without care for improving your knowledge and skills and craft, then by all means jump from one full-featured engine to the next, replacing your mental schema for "how games are made" with the high-level abstractions and systems of one complex piece of software with that of another.

(if any downvoters could explain why they find this post to be disagreeable, I'd love to hear it.)
Unethical people commit fraud in the real world.

Ethical people don’t.

The original advice was that such “embellishment” was normal.

My response is that it’s only normal to unethical people.
Anything bad is attributed to immoral ways of the people by all religions. A disaster is something religions don’t waste, and they always point out god is angry. Happens in every country.
I did not realize bit warden uses azure. I will now be changing password managers. Never trust MS to do anything.
I think you’ll find outside of a tiny niche, it is the standard definition across the world.

As I said to another commenter, maybe some introspection is required here.
camera artefact - that matches thermal imaging, that matches radar data from AEGIS cruiser, that matches sighting by multiple highly trained fighter jet pilots
> Neither of those two framings are themselves in any way grounded in science.

Neither of those two framings are religions, either.

> You can further go on to think that all life is sacred, and killing a fly is not morally any different from killing a man.

I don't recognise environmentalism in your description of it. I still think this is straw manning. I admit it's a broad church, and you could probably find somebody that thinks like this, but you're not describing any kind of mainstream.

(Feel free to reply, but I'm out. But I just wanted to say you've been completely reasonable while putting forth your viewpoint.)
"The whole problem with a sea of notifications is that it’s hard to identify what’s important and what’s not."

a) If there's far too many notifications, the bulk of them is not important. If only because you'd easily overlook them even if they were 'important'.

b) Is it difficult to decide between those few notifications that matter (like, those you act upon), and all the rest? (like, those you ignore).
My (Ahmedi) family is originally from Gurdaspur district, and while we had a picture of Nanak around, I don’t remember hearing about Syed Ahmad Sultan (although I have heard of him by the name of Sakhi Sarwar) but rather Data Ganj Bakhsh, Hz. Khizr (especially), Bulleh Shah and the “Char Yaar”
I don't actually like this answer but there's likely some truth to it.

I am reminded that when I bought a house in my twenties, at the scheduled closing there was some detail that was incorrect. There was a line in the document where we had to say something like "Yes, x paper is in hand." In reality, I think we were still waiting for it.

And when I was like "But this isn't true. Shouldn't we wait until we have this?" the banker said "That's your call."

So it was lie about it because the paperwork wasn't going to go through if it said anything other than "Why, yes, we absolutely have that!" or delay closing on the house, which could mean losing it. So I signed.

And it never came up again. No one ever called and said "But what about blah?"

If you are knowledgeable about the bureaucratic process, you may know which check boxes must be checked off, true or not, to file it and in most cases don't actually matter. If you aren't knowledgeable, you are seriously gambling.

So in reality, this kind of thing does go on, like it or not. And if you are too pedantic, you can't get things done. Things will grind to a halt while you dot every I and cross every T.
IMO a semantic layer is a nice UX/DX improvement over plain SQL in a business/analytics setting. I use a semantic layer* for >95% of use cases and fall back to SQL when needed. This balance will be different for each business of course.

* https://github.com/totalhack/zillion
And this is why the tech industry management is so hated. The OP gave an ethical example but it happened to me in a different way.

I was being pushed to release a small feature during the holiday season. While we were on track to release it, the CTO announced that we should not release anything during the holidays so that customers can take a breather and that our company is not responsible for their failures. So, we waited to roll it out until after the holiday since the CTO himself asked us to exercise caution.

Come review time, my manager berates me for not releasing fast and for "constantly missing deadlines". I asked why the CTO is asking us to exercise caution and why he is asking us to push. I asked what would happen if there were to be an outage during the holidays.

This infuriated the manager and he had it for me for a long time. And he was only furious because I caught his BS. The only reason he wanted me to go faster was to make himself look good. But if something were to fail and if the CTO checked, I was to be the fall guy.

Aside from the "all managers are not like this" trope, can anyone tell me why engineers should trust such managers when they play such games with us?
Your advice is to mislead and obfuscate to maintain a lie.
All the positive comments seem fake
Real life bts of la cage aux folles, Tootsie or Mrs Doubtfire
> We’ve got a tendency towards hero culture as a society, in which we expect one person to solve the problem. That fails on almost any problem of reasonable size and impact

We're past hero culture as far as I can tell. We're firmly in superhero culture aka entertainment divorced from reality.

Also, I don't think there exists a coherent culture anymore. 'Anyone can do whatever they want as long as I get mine' is not a culture - it's a canary in the coalmine and the canary is dead.
Business requirements change over time, specially at the beginning, you may have 80% certainty of the schema today but not in four months.
Bulk of their revenue comes from non-gambling. 69.8% of casinos revenue is non-gambling. [1]
For gambling revenue, slots are responsible for 67%. [2] I doubt that it is a small minority that is gambling away at thousands and thousands of the slot machines.

[1] https://igamingbusiness.com/casino/more-bullishness-for-las-...

[2]https://www.forbes.com/sites/willyakowicz/2023/02/01/nevada-...
> and yet the only way many addicts can get and stay clean is through exactly a zero tolerance approach

As long as pointless hostility gets a pass (as it does in your reply) and is allowed to be part of a solution - it isn't a great solution.
Yes. This is why I don't do customers any more.
This seems very French, and also very irrational.

Show me some causative data that the cruises cause these problems, and they might have an argument other than "I seem to be having more trouble breathing"

Disclaimer: Fan of cruises (and not initially, but Harmony of the Seas changed me somehow)
Well, when it's put like that ^^.

It's just that I never thought about it in that way, that outlook took me by surprise :).

I read the Howard Carter biography more than 25 years ago and I don't remember much about that aspect, I was more geeking about lotr at that time than Tolkien's opinions.
Ease of access is largely irrelevant when people need to eat either way so they can just make larger portions, eat a few extra chips when snacking etc.

Don’t get me wrong obesity does relate to the overall abundance of calories, my point is that singling out soda or candy isn’t going to do much by itself.
The amount of bitcoin in circulation is very much determined by policies - the software of the bitcoin clients and servers. It is quite possible that mining rewards will be altered in the future as the amount dries up.
[PRQL dev here]

I strongly think we should have the best examples of SQL to compare against. I've ironically made this complaint for other libraries, so I'm alarmed that folks think we might have done the same.

We would take a PR for the first example if folks think that's better spacing. (I think the spacing is the only difference?)

For the second — `USING` isn't fully equivalent to `ON`. There are discussions on GH (https://github.com/PRQL/prql/issues/723) as to which we should compile to. In the meantime, we'd take a PR on anything that is equivalent.
I don't think that would solve it for them at all. They'll still want to lock you in with their services and whatnot. Besides, they probably don't have the rights to open source the engine.

They should just cap their take at "up to 5% rev share". At least at that point there's no worry about runaway costs.
Vercel and co managed to mangle the one benefit you mentioned.

They introduced the concept of a "server component": one that is rendered once and cannot update state.

And instead of making that opt-in, they made it the default.

—

That is to say, the default of React is to no longer allow updating state in components.

No value proposition is safe from the forces of financially incentivized thought leaders.
SWIFT is a decentralized system with irreversible transactions.
People seem to need an easy insult to denigrate men that is based on their sexuality. "Wanker" or "jerk-off" might get you banned, also it feels outdated. "Incel" is the new all-around insult thats easy to use and usually hard to argue against because it basically means nothing.
Because of ZIRP, there's an entire generation of business leaders that have mastered raising money but have no idea how to make it. Expect to see many more own goals like this in the next few years as they try to figure out how.
That is the argument of the first MVP by a startup and then it is their onlien product.

I have this seen also in automotive. "This is no problem, because this is not connected to the Internet." Then a few years later you have a DefCon presentation "GM hack, you can control the whole car via the Internet".
With the right series of prompts and criteria ChatGPT could probably whip up an effective virtual nanny.
> the cost is unsustainable

While I am a huge proponent of public transportation and thus think this study is stupid on the face of it, in favor of actually having buses, we should, and in fact do, subsidize transportation. Oil is heavily subsidized, as are the roads themselves. IMO we should also subsidize public transportation to a much larger degree. That Uber/Lyft is able to be a transportation option if subsidized then, doesn't indight it on the face of it for me. Much as I hate to admit it, that is. I also hate to admit that there are times when Uber/Lyft are actually the superior option, and it makes sense to subsidize. Eg if you're not critically injured, an Uber/Lyft to the hospital ER works out better.
ZFS has been very reliable for me since 2006 or so when I first started using it on SPARC hardware with the Solaris 10 beta; I assume that since they have a backup server and a primary server, they don't update and reboot them both at the same time.
> whatever occurred would not be recognized as a pentest

Unless they specifically claimed compliance with some standard, then there is no single and universally recognized Pen Test definition.
For “injury,” I believe the payment to the party telling the lie is sufficient. You’re purchasing a service under false pretences, which is a harm in and of itself.
In the long-run, this will be very small. They do not have huge resource requirements of batteries. Though at the moment, these things have zero scale so repair costs are exaggerated.
I'm not sure what you expected to happen, but you should be archiving all your correspondence with your director in personal storage and start looking for another job.

Whether this is fraud depends on your jurisdiction, but the fact that you're even asking the question probably means there are some uncomfortable conversations in your future.

I'd say do one of two things:

1. Attend the Zoom and bring the original copy of the document you produced. Explain that you had nothing to do with any alterations, and that there has never been pen-testing of any kind. Then let them fire you. Again, save every piece of correspondence in storage that is under your control -- personal cloud, printed copies in your basement, whatever.

2. Resign effective immediately and cite that you were asked to make false statements to a client. Then file for unemployment and dare them to contest it.
Yes, in fact the early adopters are just normal people.
I completely reject Goodhart’s “law”. Good metrics are proxies for real things that cannot be gamed. If your metric does not have this quality, delete it.
> Why is housing magically different from from the innumerable other things we regularly buy even though their value depreciates after purchase?

It might be good or bad, but clearly it is very different simply due to price.

If a relatively cheap trinket depreciates to zero, hardly anyone cares.

Cars are generally the second most expensive thing people will ever buy and they depreciate, which does bother most people from a financial perspective. But they last a long time and while they are very expensive they're not life-changing expensive.

A house though, is going to cost decades of your labor, so having that depreciate too fast is going to scare a lot of people.
I was, yes. I think it's one of the most beautiful ever. It's so readable, both in print and digitally.

https://www.fonts.com/font/linotype/helvetica

It was once widely available on OS/browser, but is increasingly not. It's not on Win 11 or the latest Chrome, for example.

I glossed over your performance criteria, however; shame on me.
It's more fair to say that currencies only decided to 'go infinite' starting in 1971. [1] Up until then Western currencies were still driven by the Bretton Woods System. [2] In this system the USD was convertible to gold at a fixed rate, which was a defacto gold backing. Of course 50 years feels like an eternity to most of us, because it's literally our entire existence. But on a historic scale 'infinite' currencies may yet end up being one of the most short-lived widescale experimental failures in monetary systems, ever.

This is even more true if one considers that after we defaulted on our obligations under Bretton Woods, we almost immediately transitioned to the petro dollar, making the USD the only way to obtain the most in-demand commodity in existence. So it still kind of had a backing. We've only really started to become 'free floating' extremely recently as more major oil producers turn against the petrodollar. And it doesn't seem to be leading to happy places.

[1] - https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system
Support for Gwent will end this year and Hearthstone is soon 10 years old and not that relevant for Blizzard. Their much more important game Diablo Immortal uses a different engine.

The big publishers only used that engine for a few offshoots and this change will guarantee that won't happen again.
That would be quite something. Perhaps this would also result in Unity's ad business being shuttered or at least sanitized, similar to how Shazam shed all of its third party tracking junk after Apple bought it.
Check out eInkBro Browser if you haven't already. It saved my sanity when I started using my eInk tablet.
> Readers of this Substack will know I am not exactly a conservative.

His substack:

Why is the leader of the UK Labour party so untrustworthy?
Proportional representation just isn’t worth the hassle.
Universities should disaffiliate from LGBTQ+ rights charity Stonewall.
The Conservatives may be becoming a party of the middle.
Decolonization of the curriculum is the revenge of administrators.
Why liberals cannot escape intolerance.
How conservatism became more reasonable.
Does liberal bias affect academia?
The conservative case against Marine Le Pen.
How bad has the left got?
Why don’t liberals support free speech anymore?
Why don't the left support the family?
Why liberals cannot acknowledge Twitter discrimination against conservatives.
The 2023 comp has opened: https://csscgc23.blogspot.com/

Any recommendations on a 48k Speccy emulator for linux? edit: and a 128k one please
Why is it not possible for a company to keep doing what they were doing when they became successful. In case of Unity a cross platform game toolkit. But no. They wanted to add all kinds of shitty functionality. I dont really get it. It must be all the non gaming people taking over the company looking at Excel sheets and other graphs to find new income streams by implementing the crappiest features ever. They need to put those people on a public shame list so they wont be hired ever again. I hope these kind of companies die quickly.
I don’t think /s is needed. Tech firms already wish they could act that way, and if they aren’t, it’s only because they’re not able to.
And the software of the bitcoin clients is at least in theory determined by the users.

If someone alters the amount of bitcoins out there, my wallet software won't recognize those bitcoins as legitimate.
I think that what really makes us not take action after we read something is this notion of "I will get back to it later" that we get after highlighting or writing notes about it.

You have to be deliberate. If you think something is worth exploring and applying, put it in you calendar or todo list to dive deeper into it in day you have time.

Only write notes for things that a nice to have, for the crucial ones take action and write about your experience with it.

Here is how I go about it:
I have a file named on-my-mind.md where I write a short sentence over something I was thinking or thought was interesting. I keep it short. I also have a current.md with something I'm focusing on now — I it read everyday.

If I'm reading a book, I make sure to do the exercises before marking as complete and re-read each chapter after before going to the next. If what I'm learning can improve my work or life, I put it on-my-mind.md.

I consult on-my-mind.md a lot during the day, it's like a state machine for me.

If I thought something was interesting, but don't have the time budget to commit, I will put it on calendar for some day in the future so I can dive deep then. I basically send letters to my future self, and I have this contract of always acting on what I put on the calendar and/or todo list, so it has to be important before it goes there.
The key part here is that they observe it being selective to cancer cells. That could be huge. But I imagine this on the bench, not a animal trial, so not much exploration of side effects yet
I don't... think so? He clearly intended to create a deceptive document, and wrote separately that it was false (don't delete this, wink wink, nudge nudge). The director didn't hold a gun to his head.
This is a ridiculous take, Rowling is basically a cookie cutter late-second wave feminist, exactly the kind of person you'd expect a liberal in the 80s to be.

And since I assume you're inferring she's conservative from the popular opinion that she's anti-trans, if you read her political views, she supports transgender rights unequivocally but doesn't like what she perceives as MtF support encroaching on support systems for biological women. Make what you will of exactly "how" liberal she is, but she is literally pro-trans-rights and a feminist which is completely incompatible with conservatism. And furthermore, it's exactly the kind of take you'd expect from someone who formed their political identity in the 80s.
I’m not claiming anything—-nor an expert. Just reciting the experts[0]

It is laziness to cite a Wikipedia article without doing any research.

[0] https://www.theyucatantimes.com/2021/05/the-mythical-underwa...
Conservative is good when the alternative is moral rot that supports promiscuity.
If lying to people pays really well and you can get away with it your whole life many people will gladly take that option.
> "We leverage our own proprietary data model, so you can appreciate that we won't go into a lot of detail, but we believe it gives an accurate determination of the number of times the Runtime is distributed for a given project."

This is incredible. They've given themselves the right to demand any amount of money as determined by them alone.
I'm sure there are other types of scams too right?
I can believe that of Chimay. They've always been more commercial. And maybe Rochefort.

But Orval is doing this? Westmalle? Westvleteren?
What's SoC?