skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not sure what point is being made here. I agree that many people will mindlessly and uncritically accept labels. But this comment feels cynically critical of any attempt to study psychology. Psychology is hardly the only science with an embarrassing history and many mistakes.
Keep the structure and services around IP protocol (DNS, DHCP, NAT), just with more bits for address. Do not try to reinvent the wheel and add unnecessary breaking bell and whistles which nobody asked for.
But how else will I signal my superiority over others if I use clear language???
You keep confusing horizontal scaling with microservices. The two are basically unrelated. You have to horizontally scale regardless of whether you are running regular services or microservices - the goal of micro services is just to increase the granularity of horizontal scaling (or, more often, to solve organisational issues around feature/code ownership)
Python's flag would definitely be a coconut, surrounded by a concerning amount of whitespace.

("Would", as Guido van Rossum sadly already retired as BDFL)
Fantastic. Thanks for chiming in!
> This is a misconception about so called zero trust. You can't "just" pass the same token to someone else. They can use it to impersonate or misuse the token later.

Put another way, JWTs used as bearer tokens have vulnerable to intra-audience replay attacks.

While this is true for many zero trust architectures, but you don't have to build zero trust architectures this way. Simply have the token commit to a public key of a signing key held by the identity, then you can do Proof-of-Possession and remove these replay attacks. This is the direction zero trust is headed. For instance AWS is slowly moving toward this with sigV4A. Most zero trust solutions aren't there yet.
The industry is switching to IPv6, just slowly. Google's report of the fraction of users accessing its services on IPv6 steadily rises by a few percent a year. Right now it's at about 45%, so it'll be the majority in about two years.
That’s very interesting, so thank you — how do you handle if the eigenvectors change over time?
I would like to see Checked C (coming out of Microsoft Research) gain more traction.
Tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Was there something you were confused about?
pre-911, entering and staying in the US was easy. It did not take some mastermind network. even today, millions of Americans are undocumented
Interestingly https://github.com/cerner/clara-rules redirects to https://github.com/oracle-samples/clara-rules so I'd guess Cerner was acquired by Oracle, although the repo is Apache 2 and doesn't seem to have any weird stuff in their contributing.md

For me, the "It's just Clojure" part is a drawback, not only for me personally but when I think about the kind of audiences that I have traditionally wanted to author rules, between a real, lisp-y, dynamically-typed, programming language and asking folks to write in the Drools DSLs, I'll take my chances with the DSLs
Did some quick napkin maths, and the energy required to raise sea temperatures one degree requires the energy of 1 368 000 gigatons of TNT equivalent. In comparison, Tsar Bomba is estimated 50–58 megatons of TNT, so you'd need quite a lot of these to produce the same effect.

According to NOAA, there's 1.335×10^9 km^3 of water in the oceans. This amounts to 1.335×10^21 liters, and with the density of sea water of 1.025kg/L, 1.368×10^21 kg.

The heat capacity of water is 4182 J/(kg×K) around room temperature. This means that when the temperature of oceans raise one degree (Celsius/Kelvin), the energy needed is (1.368×10^21 × 4182) J = 5.722544×10^24 J.

One gigaton of TNT equivalent releases 4.184×10^18 J of energy, and dividing the above result with this, you get the amount of gigatons required.
And now you have two problems...
Scientists in China have turned regular old bamboo into a transparent material
The Internet Archive is under a DDoS attack
I saw this when looking at how the terrible Virgin Media TV dongle has a YouTube app! Nice to see it being open source!
I've tried introducing myself as "I'm a human", you'd think everyone would agree with this label but it gets unenthusiastic reactions. The followup "You're human too, right?" is even worse.
I'm yelling at the people doing this shit, not you :)

Somehow it is getting more and more common. I stayed at a hotel last year that used 1.0.0.0/24 on its LAN (yes, '1' not '10', I couldn't believe it at first).
Does it have precompiled binaries for embedded systems?

My problem is that embedded systems usually have little compute power so compiling stuff for them is really tiresome (and cross-compiling is another nightmare), so I apt-get what I can and compile as little as possible.

Also, afaiu, Nix is tied to a particular version of libc which has a high probability of not working with the vendor-installed libraries on my systems.
Also in the http world, the header used for authentication is called “Authorization”
Because file conversion is pure (in the functional programming sense). It produces an output based solely on the given input, without side effects.

If you have to implement a pure function by splitting it across multiple services, there is something very, very wrong with your software architecture.
Memory safety doesn't fix fundamental design flaws.
It's good to have an alternate experience shared, thanks!

Perhaps the stories I have heard are from people with particularly bad/aggressive sales reps, or who are particularly bad negotiators on their side.

I will say, though, that the free plan is marketted as without traffic/bandwidth limits, and has no traffic limits in it's terms of service, no? If it is possible to abuse it with an amount of bandwidth, rather than this being a "feeling", wouldn't it be more clear and transparent and respectful to just make it clear in the terms?
There's literally a link in the article showing this claim to be thoroughly debunked.
This doesn't seem to cover API keys or bots, which have authentication mechanisms, but who's typical workflows lack the "enters" or "leaves" concepts you describe.

For example, I can log into OpenAI, generate an API key, log out, and then use that key to access their systems across a network
I can’t really think of a product with the requirement of max 6TiB data. If the data is big as TiB, most products have 100x TiB rather than a few ones.
> did the cats eat the chickens and take their place

Maybe not the adults, who are big enough to be a challenge, but almost certainly the chicks.

A friend of mine who lives on a farm was trying to get ducks to live on his pond. He was advised to shoot all the feral cats he could find, which he did. He still has something of a problem with snapping turtles nabbing the ducklings as they swim, but he's working on that too.
It really surprises me that women's needs were neglected when mens' erectile dysfunction was quickly addressed back in the 90s.

But back then few women were on road bikes. Perhaps this is why it took so long for this article to appear.

Another factor is that bike shops are heavily male. It's quite understandable that women don't want to discuss their saddle anatomy with bike shop staff.
Extremal black holes: a black hole graveyard?
Ipv4 is deeply flawed and needs to be replaced, but how is it insecure? CVEs are specifically for security issues.
There is also the multiple-endpoints principle to think about. The likelihood of this particular set of galaxies forming a ring is very low. The chance of some set of galaxies among all the billions in the sky doing this is much higher.
Then we notice and cherry-pick only the one interesting data point, we never notice all the mundane ones.

It's always difficult to tell if a popular-science article is really describing something unusual or if it's using selective perception to create the illusion of one. (I have no idea in this case.)
I could see an argument for using the less precise terminology for user facing error messages, but certainly not on the technical side.
I remember some messy conventions in electronics as a reason.

The conventional flow of current goes from positive terminal to negative. But electrons actually flow from negative terminal to positive.
I once operated a very low usage webservice that used JWT for auth. We got hit with a DDoS and it was trivial to mitigate by using AWS API gateway to drop HTTP requests that didn't contain a valid JWT for the IDPs we supported.

Making authentication only require a signature verification at the edge (JWT) vs authentication middleware that needs to do a DB read (opaque), can be a life saver even if you have 10 requests a second most of the time.
Once again "conspiracy theories" turn out to have been spoiler alerts.
> I don’t think the original wording is odd

This may be a regional thing but the second just sounds better to me:

Texas may well execute soon an innocent man
Texas may soon execute an innocent man

“on the false premise” is also strange. I don’t think it’s really a logical argument so much emotional manipulation around an images of a dead and bruised body that was compelling. Kids are tough, the idea of shaking hard enough to damage a neck is plausible but to cause serious bruises is difficult to believe. Add in evidence of a serious medical condition and you get a different picture than just a false premise.

> It feels like an intentionally un-charitable, adversarial reading.

Saying this might be the first isn’t strictly speaking wrong as far as I can tell. I don’t know of anyone proven to be innocent that’s been executed. Sure, it’s likely happened several times, but I can’t exactly put a firm number so it may well be zero.
Not op but what's JV?
All of these things already exist for IPv6, although I don't know how much DHCPv6 is deployed in practice.
> The animals they raised were for occasional or special times not daily consumption

My mother was one of 14 kids growing up on a small farm in the West of Ireland in the mid-20th century. They ate meat (mostly bacon, home-killed and salted) cooked on an open fire 6 days a week, except during Lent
>login and permission.

These words do not capture everything that authorization and authentication entail. As stated several times in this thread, permissions are specific part of what authorization entails, not the entirety.

>Sometimes I feel like we enjoy fancy terms more than we enjoy unambiguous terms

Authorization and authentication are unambiguous.
Tell HN: Stwicfm,Woitwicfy
I got the most amazing slack from the CEO:

"sending this when its convenient for me, work on it whenever is convenient for you."

Maybe every slack message should be assumed to be STWICFM,WOITWICFY unless otherwise stated. Would clear up so many freak outs over messages from the boss at odd times.
Yes, it does that, assuming you read in the entire CSV, which works for CSVs that fit in memory.

With Parquet you almost never read in the entire dataset and it's fast on all the projections, joins, etc. while living on disk.
Get your brother a glass screen protector for his phone. I haven't cracked a phone screen in a decade yet I've gone through many cracked screen protectors.
> Everybody knows what an "authority" is. It means they have power or capability.
>
> Everybody knows what authentic means. Something that is proven to be genuine.

And yet a lot of the devs I work with (I'd even go a say most) can't really explain to you the difference between both concepts and use "auth" as a blanket keyword ; which that word allows since it has the same root.

I think that proposal isn't bad because it makes a distinction using simpler words. I'd also prefer for people to learn that simple difference, but that's what we get.
Helix-gpui: A simple GUI for the Helix editor
Looked interesting until I saw that there's a monthly fee.

> Just like your own flock, we need to feed ours in order to get eggs. That’s why our membership is required to unlock the full intelligence of your coop.
How does AI impact my job as a programmer?
Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40489486
IIRC, their ELI5 testimony to the Senate (not the one you linked elsethread) is that RenTec's long-term strategy is to make a small profit over many many transactions. Versus buy and hold, or value invest, or whatever.

I don't understand anything about finance. That said, it sounds to me that RenTec is (or portraying themselves as) a classic volatility based hedge fund.

(A good friend is a hedge fund trader. He has tried to explain the maths to me a few times. Something something about Brownian motion, NPV, predicting herd migration. Alas, I am but a simple bear.)

But all their data collection gives me pause. I do think they they're better at spotting market signals. Like using FourSquare check-in location data to predict retail performance. Like using a VPN to spy on users to spot emerging competing startups.

My pet theory is that RenTec's play is restraint, to be patient slow capital. Even though they (probably) have data for bonanza predictions, like your NVDA example, they some how have the discipline to eek out modest profits, preferring consistency over riding the tiger.
“Login” implies a state change, which “authentication” doesn’t.

“Authorization” can refer to a process, which “permissions” doesn’t.
By convention, electrical current flows in the direction of the movement of positive charge.

However, in the typical case, what's moving is electrons, which means the "current" is flowing in the opposite direction of the movement of the electrons. This is stupid and everyone hates it.
> I used this approach mainly to have the button component behave as a link button and a form submit button.

Personally I think the "proper" way to do this would be use just <a> for links, and <button> for submitting forms, and then have the same CSS styles applied to both so that both <button>'s and <a>'s look the same visually if that's what you're going for.

I'm not particularly familiar with Go, but I'd either make the wrapping tag name itself a template variable (maybe an enum between "Anchor" and "Button"? again not familiar with Go) or have two components one for forms and one for links. If I've understood the syntax, something like this?

<{{.Tag}} class="button-container"></{{.Tag}}>

But given both <button>'s and <a>'s have lots of different attributes to manage its behaviour and state (name/value/type/disabled vs href/rel/target etc) I'd personally split them into two separate components, even if it ends up doubling up some of the logic and styles.

> What are the drawbacks of this approach? I'm pretty sure I've used this before, can't recall any downsides.

As others have mentioned, while it's technically invalid browsers will still happily accept it so there's no real issue with it, personally I just find it a bit quirky to read. There's no harm in leaving it just as it is :)
JWTs are best practice for OAuth as it can transport claims. It’s up to your application if you continue to use it after the initial flow.
You are fine to convert it, but most apps don’t as it’s easier.
i.e. https://www.huntonak.com/hunton-employment-labor-perspective... “right to disconnect”
> My concern is the number of charger stations required between LA and Phoenix in the remote sections of I-10.

I'm assuming there are already gas stations on this "remote" stretch of road (all of 370 miles).

What power service do those gas stations already have?

Bulldoze the gas station and put EV chargers in their place. Problem solved.
> the US currently has 188,600 public and private charging ports

That seems... very low. Admittedly I'm from UK, but I don't know a single EV owner that doesn't have a home charger.
You are right, but sometimes hybrid is just a reality. For us it would be an absolute game changer when you do not have to rush to find an empty meeting room or phone booith.
Can you provide some examples here using modern JWT libraries? I'm not saying you are wrong or right, but this comment as it is written doesn't add much to the discussion.
This is NOT how the CVE system is used.
Docker desktop also uses 127.0.0.11 for dns
Why do you need modules at all for C++ to be more successful than Rust? That's the world we currently inhabit, for reference.
It certainly can - I think artificial sweeteners are great examples. There are experimental studies that show that artificial sweeteners can cause cancer in animal studies, but as of yet there's no clear evidence of that showing up for any definable population in the real world[1].

Chemicals linked to cancer (or other conditions) are cause for concern! It's important to note & track these things. But the dose makes the poison and it's totally possible to inject a chemical that 100% causes cancer (under some circumstances) with no adverse impacts.

[1] https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/d...
> But you can’t just turn a nuclear reactor on and off

No, but I can regulate its output up and down. You don't have to turn a reactor off entirely, its output can be regulated up and down without shutting down completely.

> and makes it more commercially viable for batteries.

The problem with batteries isn't commercial viability. The problem is physical availability. There simply isn't enough Li in the world to make Solar as powerful as it would need to be to stem a majority of our energy requirements, and as of now, we don't have another battery technology that would be suitable.

At a macro view, the whole thing isn't an economic question.

Here are the three facts:

1. We cannot continue with fossil fuel power as we did before (because climate change)

2. Solar isn't up to the task of taking (among other reasons because we don't have the storage required)

3. The worlds energy demands are increasing. Maybe it could be made to grow slower, but reversing it is unlikely

So, what options does that leave us with? Wind suffers from similar problems as Solar. Hydro is geographically limited, as is Tidal. Geothermal is likely too weak. Fusion power doesn't exist yet. And as cool as a Dyson-Swarm would be, that's even further away than Fusion.

So, what technology remains?
Yeah even that has caused me trouble. I usually just copy the problem file to another directory, checkout the file from the repo, pull, and then diff/merge my changes. It may sound like more work, and maybe it is, but I understand what's happening and it's rare enough for me that to do it "the git way" I'd have to look it up every time.
Are you talking about frontrunning? That happens in both blockchain-based trading systems as well as private systems, but on the blockchain it's easy to see that it's happening and what address is doing it (transparency). Anyone can frontrun on the blockchain, so it becomes a much more level playing field.

Front running on the blockchain can also be combatted through various approaches like a commit and reveal scheme, but that slows down the market and hasn't been adopted widely
I had this exact experience trying to install Common Lisp. Installed emacs and wtfed out of there 30 min later having learned nothing and feeling slightly traumatized.
Career Doesn't Need to Have a Purpose
The details in the article describe saddles from Specialized that solve the problem for women. It also says that men prefer and are able to use the same saddles (Mimic and Mirror), which is why Specialized doesn’t make women’s and men’s saddles separately anymore.

The larger problem is that most bicycles still seem to be sold with sub-par and harmful saddles. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of competition and innovation here for the mass market. One could buy a bicycle costing several hundred (or even a few thousand) dollars or euros with a lighter body, fancy brakes, suspension and so on, but you’d still get sub-par saddles.

As a non-cyclist, I’m curious to know if there’s even any kind of standardization to fit saddles to any bicycle…or is it that most common bicycles cannot have these custom or other better saddles fitted at all?
Just drop all ipv4 traffic for one minute at noon UTC every day. Next month, extend it to two minutes. The stragglers will switch.
Why do you suppose that might be? Difficulty: if you think the latches are a bad idea, back up your point with actual statistics.
Doug Ingle, frontman of rock band Iron Butterfly, dies aged 78
> Not allowing for whatever customisation any particular nerd wants is not ‘anti-competitive’.

This is plainly wrong. It's not inherently anticompetitive to set limits, it is anticompetitive to break those limits to promote your own product. It's quite literally one of the only formative moments of the internet, where Microsoft was rightfully sued (and nearly broken-up) for artificially blocking Netscape's market access.

Today, Apple is headed down pretty much the exact same road. I've heard apologetics insist that Tim Cook is an angel for years now, but both me and the regulatory bodies remain unconvinced. The long fall begins now, if you're an Apple customer it would be wise to plan accordingly.

> I’d be quite within my rights to call them psychotic.

You'd look like an idiot doing so, but sure you're well "within your right" to look that way. If you call someone else psychotic for paying attention to monopoly practices and wanting to make change that doesn't impact you whatsoever, then it's probably you experiencing psychosis.
The whole /8 is "on-net" for the loopback interface, but that doesn't mean it's usable to applications. On macOS, I can't ping or bind to 127.0.0.2, for example. Linux's behavior of allowing the whole /8 to be used, even when only a single address is assigned, is a bit of an oddity here.
A big problem not addressed when not using a signature based authorization scheme is that you need to hit your database for every access attempt. This makes you much more susceptible to ddos attacks.

You need to be able to turn away malicious users as fast as possible. If you take the time to check a database first, that's a precious resource they can consume.

"Add a cache!", you might say? What if they use random client id and client secret for every request, how do you cache against that?
That's pretty much all it does. It reacts to an event, fetches from an URL, swaps the result from that URL in some part of the DOM.
Build more homes
Yes, we have direct observations. /s

The light we are viewing now was emitted billions of years ago, we don't know what it looks like today.
An org with that level of technical control might well be an extremely security-conscious org. And "No IPv6 Anywhere, Ever" would make it somewhat easier to keep things secure.
Most web frameworks come with out of the box authentication plugins that will use your own database. It's plenty good enough and you still don't have to roll your own. Adding an external service adds complexity that you may not want to pay for later.
Sure it does. We can just move to ipv8, 5 octlets instead of 4. We can give 2.x.x.x.x to 10. to earth, maybe 100 to 110 for moon, mars, etc.

1.x.x.x.x will be for legacy stuff. If anything is trying to route to only 4 octlets, routers add a 1. in front of it. Bam, legacy solved.

edit: I realised people don't see the big picture here.

Step 1) We collectively engineer and deploy ipv8, along with RFCs explaining how future expansion works

2) We put all sorts of preparatory work, conversation into the eventual expansion into 6 octlets, from 5. We'll need that once we colonize multiple systems.

3) The RFC will state that "new planetary systems get space on 5th oclet, 1.200.x.x.x.x to 1.250.x.x.x.x.

4) As systems grow to need more than an ipv4 range, we transition them to their own 6th oclet. It's easy for them, because they can retain legacy 5th octlet headers.

5) We then collectively freeze our brains, so that in the future, once interplanetary, faster than light communication exists, we are thawed to deal with the 5 to 6 oclet transition!

And we all become immortal.

But no, that's fine, think small, stay non-immortal with your ipv6 Flanders!