skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What's wrong with slowly building up the hardware management features of the web? Why is that worse than releasing them in one big bang like traditional operating systems have done?

And why worry about the nomenclature to begin with? The web is already serving the use cases of an operating system for many people today whether we like it or not. So maybe it's our terminology that should change to reflect reality, rather than the other way around?
I was careful to try read what was said; the language might be a bit loose because it's a transcript of a live talk. That said, the example they gave, and their motivating problem of the qsort API in C don't show anything about using nominal interfaces, and instead look like a normal use of interfaces, combined with language about being wowed of how powerful they could be.
The Rural Juror. Oh that takes me back.
The vendor arrangement is in large part a pretext by Google to avoid their legal responsibilities. Also, the workers have the right to negotiate about more then pay and benefits, they can bargain over working conditions which Google controls.
Yeah, I do take your point, and I never denied that all of these are going to be valid consideration for some program for some customer somewhere, my main point was that in most cases, it doesn't matter. Like you said, one could probably stop there in most cases. Obviously, the needs of a program doing OCR for ancient languages is different than something spitting out and reading in text from a console or even a Win32 text entry field.
This depends if these contractors are classified as Google employees, which both Google and their actual employer Cognizant, dispute.

This also does not mean Google cannot say "no" to any demand, union or not. There is no legal obligation to accept demands from employees, union or not. Good Faith means "honest dealing" in a legal setting, and saying "No" to everything can be honest.
Did the Brexit virus remove many people's brains?

So where is the economic reasoning behind having both a 500 ml and a 568 ml package? Haven't people heard of the term 'Economies of Scale'? Pick one size and stick to it.

And it would be better to pick the size that has more export potential. Like it or not the Metric System has taken over the world. Many billions of people in the World know what 500 ml is, only a few hundred million people know what 'a pint' is.
Repetitive code is a language flaw IMO. There are certainly more concise alternatives to the common case of that loop construct in many languages.
As you pointed out, signatures make content trusted, but only to the degree of the algorithm's attack resistance. I think it's also important to define trust; for our purposes this means: authenticity (the signer deliberately signed the input) and integrity (the input wasn't tampered with).

If an algorithm is collision resistant a signature guarantees both authenticity and integrity. If it's just second preimage resistant, signing may only guarantee authenticity.

Now, the issue with Git using SHA-1 is that an attacker may submit a new patch to a project, rather than attack an existing commit. In that case they are in control of both halves of the collision, and they just need for the benign half to be useful enough to get merged.

Any future commits with the file untouched would allow the attacker to swap it for their malicious half, while claiming integrity thanks to the maintainers' signatures. They could do this by either breaching the official server or setting up a mirror.

One interesting thing to note though: in the case of human readable input such as source code, this attack breaks down as soon as you verify the repo contents. Therefore it's only feasible longer term when using binary or obfuscated formats.
It's not applicable at all once you get beyond a few teams.

A mono-repo makes decisions for your teams.
"Noise is really a form of habitat loss."

This really resonates. It's kind of obvious once it's stated, but the aural environment is part of the habitat. I bet the examples they give, such as owls listening for the sound of mice, are only a tiny subset of the ecological disruption caused by the noise of civilization, which is primarily road noise. Hopefully there will be more studies in the future like the phantom road noise experiment they mention.
All this means is that the logic was shifted client-side. You could move it all to the backend and render the HTML there if you'd rather. (I wouldn't, but it'd still be a web app, IMO).

Kinda like old school Mapquest that was server-side, vs Google Maps that used client-side tile fetches. But both are still web apps, no?
That is not how collective bargaining works in the US.
The GC needs to unwind the stack to find roots. The only difference between segmented stacks and contiguous stacks as far as unwinding the stack is concerned is that in segmented stacks the stack pointer isn't monotonically increasing as you go up. This is usually not a problem. (The only time I've seen it be a problem is in GDB, where some versions have a "stack corruption check" that ensures that the stack pointer is monotonically increasing and assumes the stack has been corrupted if it isn't. To make such versions of GDB compatible with segmented stacks, you just need to remove that check.)

Relocatable stacks are a different beast. With relocatable stacks, pointers into the stack move when the stack resizes. This means that you must be able to find those pointers, which may be anywhere in the stack or the heap, and update them. The garbage collector already knows how to do that--walking the heap is its job, after all--so typically resizable stacks are implemented by having the stack resizing machinery call into the GC to perform the pointer updates.

Note that, as an alternative implementation of relocatable stacks, you can simply forbid pointers into the stack. This means that your GC doesn't need to be moving. I believe that's what Go does, as as far as I'm aware Go doesn't have moving GC (though I'm not up to date and very much could be wrong here). This doesn't help Pike's argument, though, because in that scenario the impact of relocatable stacks on the GC is much less.

As an aside, in my view the legitimate reasons to not use LLVM would have been (1) compile times and (2) that precise GC, which Go didn't ship with but which was added not too long thereafter, was hard in LLVM at the time due to SelectionDAG and lower layers losing the difference between integer and pointer.
Legally, they must negotiate with it, if indeed they are found to be the employer.
What came first - the chicken or the egg?

Government roads effectively subsidies access to land.
So they're like python's Abstract Base Classes? (No idea which came first)
A union might span a particular office or a particular profession. There's no legal lower limit for the negotiation requirement.
K8s just so happens to be coded in Golang. A quick look at that overall codebase should be enough to disabuse people of this notion that Golang developers cannot possibly come up with confusing or overly sophisticated abstractions.
usually, when people are promoting alternatives to the car, these things need not be in exclusion to the car. In general, when a road is over a hundred feet wide, it is really not a big deal to provide an additional twelve feet for an ADA sidewalk, and maybe another twelve for a bike lane with more protection than a strip of fading paint.

the American car dependent lifestyle has mostly happened by making other lifestyles impossible. In other places you don't buy your milk for the whole week in one go, there are convenient supermarkets where you can walk in and out on your way to and from work on foot or public transport, so stopping in more frequently is a lot easier if you're not driving 15-20 minutes on arterial roads to the big box store. In most of America, it is illegal to open even slightly smaller grocery stores in areas outside big box arterial roads.
All software is application. That’s what software is for!
Saying "no" to everything won't be found to be bargaining in good faith.
To make the FPGA actually useful, it probably is connected to the PCIe lanes. Since PCIe isn't really a bus anymore, it's not clear what is possible, but I believe a PCIe device principally can access all of memory (via DMA or similar)? Maybe an IOMMU can protect that, but I would be very surprised if bugs couldn't be found especially if you can make your PCIe device speak not-quite-right PCIe.

And since it's near impossible to validate FPGA firmware functionality by the kernel, rights to send bitstreams to the FPGA is essentially equivalent of root on DOM0.
Following this logic, why doesn't Google just, you know, fire them? They're probably many millions in the hole with legal costs alone with this thing. If it was really so insignificant a group to them, it doesn't make sense they'd get to this point.

I think even if your point is valid, people over at Google are smart and understand that the future is long but precedent is eternal.

And even then, there are in fact these annoying, antiquated laws around labor in the US. They kinda have to at least respond..
> Doesn't seem as "open and shut" as The Register wants readers to believe.

Looks pretty open and shut to me. Google employed a contractor to avoid the liability of those employees unionizing. In doing so it misclassified them since it is normally work an employee would do-not a contractor under labor law. They were already caught doing this previously according to the register.

> Also, employers refuse to negotiate with employees all the time - how would this be any different? Just because an employee (or group such as one represented by a union) doesn't have their demands met does not seem to automatically be "illegal".

Once a union is recognized by the NLRB an employer is required by law to make a good faith effort to negotiate. This is what? 80-100 year old American law?

https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/your-right...

> The employee's recourse, of course, is to leave/quit. Even if these contractors were classified as Google employees, Google can probably just say "no" to any demand anyway...

That is part of why collective bargaining improves the economic situation of most Americans. Google says no, they go on strike, and Google then has to choose to eat the cost replace and retrain most of those people in this market (and hope they don't unionize) or meet the demands.

Compare this to how Costco handled a unionization recently.

https://www.inc.com/suzanne-lucas/costco-employees-vote-unio...

Added: (and hope they don't unionize)
> The NLRA says both parties must negotiate a contract in good faith.

The NLRA exists to protect unions. At dispute is if these contractors are even Google employees. This is not "over" just because NLRA says so... in fact, they have very little enforcement abilities it seems.

> Google is fine to not meet the demands of the union, they must negotiate a contract in good faith.

Good Faith is a legalese way of saying "dealing honestly". It would be honest of Google to simply say "No" to every demand. A union is not a magic ticket to getting what you want.

> They have an additional recourse: file an unfair labor practice with the NLRB and win, as they did here.

And nothing is going to happen as a result. It will be appealed, and the litigation will continue possibly for years.
Annex.K also does safe-c but not adopted by the committee.
That's not true.

Just because you want something does not mean you are entitled to something... there is no legal protections for not getting what you want - union or not.

This is why strikes happen. Demands are not met.

The unfortunate reality is this super tiny union is not going to scare Google with the threat of a strike.

And... all this hinges on if these are even Google employees, which it really seems to be a stretch to claim they are. NLRB is not an unbiased party - they exists almost exclusively to be pro-union.

The union probably would make better headway by going after their actual employer... Cognizant.
Is that any stronger than using a password if an attacker could force a connection to fall back to the password?
Visually, it looks a lot less like a copy of a BlackBerry keyboard, so that helps.

The first patent quoted in that lawsuit article has expired [1]. The second patent is still active [2], but is related to a "ramped-key keyboard" (essentially curved), which this new product is not AFAICT.

The third, a design patent [3], is still active, but would appear to only apply to a complete handheld device that includes an attached keyboard, not a separate accessory... Not a lawyer or patent expert by any means though.

I guess we'll see - none of that stops anyone from suing them.

[1]: https://patents.google.com/patent/US7629964B2/en?oq=7%2c629%...

[2]: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8162552B2/en?oq=8%2c162%...

[3]: https://patents.google.com/patent/USD685775S1/en?oq=D685%2c7...
Still waiting for multi-tasking that works as well as it did on the Pre.

Maybe one day.
This is nonsense. If you are using WPA3 Enterprise across multiple AP, you need coordination, period. This comment raises zero significant concerns.

The parent suggestion is perfectly sound. More user-friendly means to mint certs would be grand. The caveat is that, if you can mint a cert from a low security password, what's to keep an attacker from attacking the password directly, rather than the cert? It might not let them snoop traffic, but it'd still let them on with the password.
When people talk about "diversifying their income stream", whose to say this cannot be applied from a geopolitical or much less an ideological view?
The world outside of the USA that functions perfectly fine with CCS2 adapters.
Go appears to be made with radical focus on a niche that isn't particularly well specified outside the heads of its benevolent directorate for life. Opinionated to the point of "if you use Go outside that unnamed niche you got no-one to blame but yourself". Could almost be called a solution looking for a problem. But it also appears to be quite successful at finding problem-fit, no doubt helped by the clarity of that focus. They've been very open about what they consider Go no to be or ever become. Unlike practically every other language, they all seem to eventually fall into the trap of advertising themselves with what boils down to "in a pinch you could also use it for everything else".

It's quite plausible that before Go, its creators would have chosen C++ for problems they consider in "The Go Niche". That would be perfectly sufficient to declare it a C++ replacement in that niche. Just not a universal C++ replacement.
Also, the roads built are for the most part free, which certainly doesn't help regulate usage at all.

The moment you introduce tolls onto major roads, often they don't meet financial projections, have to be bailed out, etc.
P2P networking or self-hosting?
Working with deeply nested data structures in Go is still frustrating, it’s one place where the Java still wins thanks to the streams API.
Yeah, this isn't really "running at home" - which is a bit disappointing as smallstep does good work on the foss/self-host side of things (I guess this shows their seller side).

FreeRadius can help:

https://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/FreeRadius_EAP-TLS_configu...
Much, much more. Industrial-scale agriculture is by far one of the most devastating things that humans do to the environment; my focus on roads wasn't meant to imply otherwise.

(The larger observation is that, while we use more land for agriculture than we need, there is at least a prima facie argument that industrial agriculture feeds our planet. Whereas a 6 lane highway through a drained wetland to a low-density suburb does very little for our planet.)
Is there any obstacle to having a centralized server these APs talk to, which manages authentication? I'm not seeing a hard obstacle, just another piece of network kit and it's cheaper to keep a clunky UX
huh .. enitengine looks pretty much 1:1 analogous to sdl2 and sdl-gpu (what I use). Obvious ebitengine is a bit more popular and polished (it actually has a website!) but it's cool to see. It's a nice level of abstraction.
The together version found here https://nothing-together.sonnet.io/ is neat as well, you can play simple sounds to another person or a bell gong to everyone

One thing i found a bit distracting is the very obvious looping point of the background music
For me, the X and the iOS version with it (can't remember which one), with the gesture swiping etc, finally was as good as (even perhaps better than) the Palm Pre
The JS ecosystem is so goofy. Stuff like this, leftpad, and dozens more happen.

Doesn't happen to literally any other programming language (or maybe I just haven't paid attention to others)
23andMe told victims of data breach that suing is futile
On a hiking trip.
and > 96% in every else in the world
Because erlang is “weird” and not enough programmers learn it for it to have breached the cultural ramparts regarding what concurrency is in a programming language. I learned Erlang and Elixir and I’ve never been happy with any other languages’ concurrency mechanisms and primitives since then. Between multitasking features that let you avoid concurrent tasks causing CPU starvation, message passing allowing proper decoupling of concurrent tasks in both an asynchronous and synchronous ways and all the other little ways it does concurrent programming right… nothing holds a candle to it. There are some nice libraries in other languages but it’s not the same because it’s not built into the language at the same level.

Async/Await, asynchronous IO, none of this is really the same kind of “concurrency”… it’s why I wish I had more chance to use the Erlang/Elixir+Rust combo… low level safety and high level concurrency are a match made in heaven.
I'd argue that thinking about testing this isn't really worthwhile. Just change isolation level. It's not terribly slow. Your work is now much easier.
A lot of farming would not be viable without roads. It's something of a blind men and the elephant question. Roads weren't originally developed for cars; the US Constitution prescribed the authority to build roads for the postal service. Roads, especially paved roads, make it possible to send fresh produce to markets in cities hundreds of miles away, to collect grains at mills, and to distribute and maintain farm equipment.

In warm regions, wetlands were also drained to control malaria, particularly in Brazil and the American South.
I, on the other hand, am dreaming of being able to use mathematical notation in my code. Sort of like what Fortran has helped with, only on a much larger scale.
That's an interesting idea, but it seems (without having played around with it or knowing you specific setup) like it comes with some security tradeoffs. In particular, MAC spoofing would be an effective way to VLAN hop, if not necessarily a threat you're worried about. It also seems like there is a possibility that devices connected to the same AP could talk to each other without having to go through the switch, bypassing the VLAN tagging entirely.

I'm honestly not sure if the second attack would work or if it would be AP specific, but I imagine most Wifi to wifi traffic through the same AP does not make a round trip through the Ethernet port. This wouldn't be an issue if the AP itself was applying and enforcing VLAN tags, but the MAC spoofing problem would still be an issue.
What would happen if you tried to reconnect to the network and the AP didn't have the pre-shared key? Presumably, you'd prompt the user and ask them if they want to connect. This is the same pattern as trust-on-first-use (TOFU) for SSH, except for non-expert users. It's a good thought but I think it'd fall apart in practice. You'd still be vulnerable to phishing / evil twin APs.
You can get in a lot of trouble for mass firing unionized employees without a really good justification. If they fire them all and then have to re-hire people to fill the positions that could be very expensive for Google.
A Sudoku Secret to Blow Your Mind [video]
> Why is NSA-grade Wi-Fi called "192-bit mode"?

I believe this is due to the use of SHA-384, which is described as having 192 bits of "security strength"[0] against collision.

[0]: https://csrc.nist.rip/library/NIST%20SP%20800-107%20Recommen...
Maybe you missed the memo, but everything old is new again:

* We are slowly but definitely moving towards a hub-and-spoke, mainframe-and-terminal topology again. Processing is being centralized in servers and datacenters again (eg: "AI", game streaming, video and audio streaming, cloud storage, etc.), accessed from terminals again with low power consumption hardware to extend battery life, reduce manufacturing costs, and reduce consumer power use.

* Powerful consumer (and prosumer/enthusiast) hardware is becoming economically unviable again (discrete GPUs particularly), politically unfavorable (inefficient and high power consumption), and socially unfashionable (RGB and "gamer" aesthetic), further spurring the mainframe-and-terminal topology above.

* Traditionally powerful and versatile consumer (and prosumer/enthusiast) software is becoming commercially unviable and software vendors are realigning their revenue streams to adapt and survive in an increasingly cutthroat market, further spurring the mainframe-and-terminal topology above.

If you're into computing as a hobby, it might be prudent to find a new hobby soon.
Microservice compatible starter kit for Golang sass project
But there's a link so you can lease one in the cloud...

If you want to self-host, see eg:

https://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/FreeRadius_EAP-TLS_configu...
Huh. Didn't know this was a thing, but I guess I'm aphantasic.

Thanks for letting me know.
So, if you've ever worked in these contractor roles for a large tech company you will soon realize (like the NRLB does and the courts have) that it is all smoke and mirrors. You are effectively an employee of said tech company.

The union will win this one and hopefully it goes to court b/c this whole contractor scam needs to be abolished.
Because greenwashing with batteries mined by children and vegan soy-based food from toxic crops are just a way for snobs for virtue signaling.
It's all about absorption spectrum. 40W at 10600nm will burn clean through a few mm of wood but could only maybe lightly etch brass and be utterly useless on aluminum. 40W of energy is being delivered, what happens to the thing it's being delivered to is entirely dependent on absorptive potential.
you just described RADIUS
There's no shame in my statement.

The US isn't the only country in the world with big families; there's seemingly nothing exceptional about us (in that regard) that requires the pickup truck and 3-space garage where other countries get along fine. Part of the reason they get along fine is because they allow grocery stores to be built on residential corners, so that you buy 3 gallons of milk every other night on your way home rather than driving X miles to load up weekly.
Because it takes time to write a paper and publish it. And researchers usually don't care about code so the version used when starting the project is never upgraded.
> Anything loosely connected to AI + LLMs received the bulk of the attention (rightly so, as it is a new chapter in computing)

Beyond LLMs and vector search, the scope for applying AI / machine learning _within_ databases is enormous: join planning, learned indexes, compression, workload prediction, configuration tuning etc.

Given the current pace of advances perhaps a dedicated "AI in Databases in 2024" review will be on the cards this time next year.
I'm not talking about texts from people I know.

Do you not get SPAM text messages? I do. I block and report them, but I get new ones from new numbers. It's annoying.

Some of these messages have been offers to buy illegal substances. So while I absolutely don't approve of the approach this carrier took, I do understand it.