skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Their nationality certainly is not Israeli. One could say Palestinian, or Gazan, since Hamas' rule of Gaza makes it more of a separate state in practice. If one were to take the view that neither Palestine or Gaza are states (a semantic question which I don't take a position on), then they would be stateless people with no nationality.

Israel treating their Palestinian-born subjects as stateless would be illegal, so a decision must be made by Israel between the two options I described, with the respective consequences I described. By effectively exerting rule over Palestinians (especially in the West Bank), they have chosen the route that doesn't recognize Palestine as a country, and thus are obliged to treat Palestinian-born subjects equally to any other subjects under their rule. The fact that Israel denies citizenship to the millions of Palestinian-born subjects under their rule, is particularly gross.

> You're ignoring the role of asymmetric warfare and human shield tactics. The IDF is struggling to make progress as is, despite obvious military superiority. If they caved to demands to e.g. stay out of Rafah, then Hamas terrorists would essentially be untouchable, an noone can fight an untouchable enemy.

That, in turn, ignores that Israel's actions are still illegal. Put simply, the defense you cite isn't good enough to justify Israel's actions. They tried that defense, it did not succeed, here we are. The reason is that the laws were made with the possibility of "human shields" in mind, and they still made the actions illegal. It's not some novel occurrence excepted from the rules.

It does sucks to be IDF right now, but their lives aren't worth more than civilian Palestinian lives, and thus it is immoral for them to take many civilian lives to reduce their own risk of loss, and illegal for them to do so to the extent they have, even if it means they get to kill a terrorist in the process.

Here's the most important metric (superceding any Israeli desire): Fewer civilians will die if Israel withdraws and simply secures the border than will die if Israel invades. You don't have to trust me: An independent court actually evaluated both sides here and came to the same judgement, as described in the article we're discussing. Israel will either accept that they can't do whatever they want, up to and including genocide, just because they want to, or continue to parallel Russia's and North Korea's international pariah journey while angrily feigning ignorance and righteously pointing fingers at everyone but themselves. Probably the latter.
I mean, other than SpaceX, which created the world’s most reliable rocket, and delivers more mass to orbit than anyone else. Dunno how anyone could consider that a failure.
“You want to know how to paint a perfect painting? It's easy. Make yourself perfect and then just paint naturally.” - Robert M. Pirsig

The Musk reasoning here is stupid, but smart. If he makes a superhuman intelligence, he can only ask it "What is dark matter?" and it might figure out.

I have some big problems with this idea, but it isn't 100% stupid. Just 98% stupid.
So one wrong letter or wrong auto complete and we have the wrong meaning.

In security, anything that is less prone to error is good, so words that are hard to confuse or misspell are good.
The solution to authentication and authorization being hard to keep straight is to keep using authentication and authorization?

How is that a solution?
You can go further.

There are relatively cheap adapter boards which let you stick 4 M.2 drives in a single PCIe x16 slot; you can usually configure a x16 slot to be bifurcated (quadfurcated) as 4 x (x4).

To pick a motherboard at quasi-random:

Tyan HX S8050. Two M.2 on the motherboard.

20 M.2 drives in quadfurcated adapter cards in the 5 PCIe x16 slots

And you can connect another 6 NVMe x4 devices to the MCIO ports.

You might also be able to hook up another 2 to the SFF-8643 connectors.

This gives you a grand total of 28-30 x4 NVME devices on one not particularly exotic motherboard, using most of the 128 regular PCIe lanes available from the CPU socket.
I don’t think they are almost identical, they just have the same prefix. “Login” and “permission” each have the same problem: “login” is very similar to “logging”, and “permission” shares a prefix with “persistence” (or permanent). Ultimately software engineering is a broad enough field that we will necessarily have to use similar words to describe the many, many concepts
Yes, this is the trade off. If you are working in an industry where you need to be highly sensitive for data access even for short periods of times then oauth/oidc/jwts are probably not for you. If you really need an emergency escape hatch you can always rotate your singing keys and jwks and invalidate all of your tokens and force everyone to sign back in.
I'm not aware of any match between GR theory and observations when it comes to galaxy rotation curves. The wikipedia entry provides a decent description of the issue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_rotation_curve
> I would generally assume it to be random.

But its not, it has structure - it looks like ring or arc. The universe should be homologous at this scale.
so is purl.org
I encourage doing a bit of reading about the mistreatment of women in US medicine in the 90s and beyond, specifically with regards to how doctors disregard complaints of pain from women (and continue to do so to this day). Most women have stories of how a doctor blew them off when they sought medical help for pain and/or disfigurement concerns, especially with regards to any body parts not commonly possessed by men.
Could you please provide examples.

I see comments stating that, but no examples.
One type and you have a problem.

Maybe it's better to use less similar words if it's security related.
less-than-ideal? You want more than half of people to read no books?
A special license is always a scary sight: https://github.com/nocobase/nocobase/blob/main/LICENSE.txt

These terms are incompatible with AGPL:

> 4.1 The Software uses a dual license type of AGPL-3.0 Open Source License https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3..en.htm and Commercial License.

> 5.4 It is not allowed to remove or change the brand, name, link, version number, license, and other information about NocoBase on the Software interface, except for the main LOGO in the upper left corner of the page.

> 5.5 It is not allowed to remove or change all intellectual property statements about NocoBase in the code.

> 5.6 It is not allowed to provide any form of no-code, zero-code, low-code platform SaaS products to the public using the original or modified Software.
It appears that this link is to the domain bbc.co.uk, the other is to bbc.com.
> In those same regions a sort of sweetened hot mate drink is typically made for children. Do you have that in Paraguay? It's called "Mate-doce", and I'm pretty sure it's not related to what you described as "cocido", which I've never heard of

We also have "mate dulce" but it's mate usually only in name. It's made with coconut and other stuff, but drank in a mate gourd. As far as I can tell (I'm no expert, never made or drank the stuff) it does not carry yerba mate at all.
> non-native English speakers

Hum... I imagine you mean people without any Latine inheritance in their culture. Those words are very good words on way more languages than English.

Those words are also shared with other domains, where they have compatible meanings, and that intersect the usage in computer systems. So you'd better fix them there too.

Besides "permission" is not a verb, and "login" is one between a lot of different ways to authenticate people. What do you intend to do with the correct meaning of those words once you overload them?
Some people made the distinction here, jwt on the front end vs the micro services across the network.

I've experienced more than once, issues where the auth service has bugs and the logged out session is still valid for a long time. Or an attacker that figured out the micro services blueprint and now had authed access to the entire network.

Jwt is still useful between services, however the front end can do just fine with a session id that can be easily revoked.
Introduction to On-Device AI
New macOS Bug: Screenshot Sound Plays When AirPods Connect/Disconnects
The way you describe it is similar to what I know of 'Mate-doce. From the parent post I got the impression it was something different in its preparation and I was curious to understand exactly if/how it differs
That wiki's list of links isn't always the most up-to-date.
His justification for not supported stateful dhcpv6 is completely reasonable and I wish more platforms had come to the same conclusions.
The author is Jay Devore.
Finding God is certainly a lifestyle change :)
Every formation of galaxies has structure.

Random processes can appear to have meaningful structure, but that’s just because we value some outcomes more than others.

> The universe should be homologous at this scale.

That doesn’t mean we’re going to perceive it as homologous. A true random number generator spitting out 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 would be freaky as fuck to see, but that doesn’t make it non random.
But authentication and authorization are often used in the same context where confusion is lethal.
The issue is that they have the same prefix AND that unfortunately this prefix is used to abbreviate both words.

What does the "auth" module ?
I get what you're doing, but the problem is that "login" and "permissions" are ambiguous in the context of Identity Management. For example, "Delete-User" is a permission that defines some 'permitted action', but it does not imply "Administrator" role or a set of policies that should be governing access to some resources. So by trying to fix one semantic issue, you're introducing a bunch of other ones.
Indeed. "Logging in" implies some kind of long lasting session. And logging in conceptually only requires "identification" (e.g. via a username) but not necessarily "authentication" (e.g. via a password)
No, they probably don't. They probably know exactly what they are saying.
Looks like someone at Amazon is trying juke those remainded servers again. When is the IRS gonna catch up with this? They are worse OpenAI at abusing their non-profit status.
Pandora (Computer)
If you look at the suggested measures, you will see that for example, the Big-5 personality traits are on there. https://renaissance.stonybrookmedicine.edu/sites/default/fil.... Although self-reported, I wouldn't say Big-5 is "subjective". The measures have good test-retest validity and many independent scales have been developed and found to be strongly correlated. I would argue this means Big-5 is not just "you answered this question on this scale" - it is measuring something deeper, maybe not personality per se but at least a mental attitude. I could easily see extending this sort of measurement process to all of the traits in DSM, and I think it is a worthwhile goal.

There are two issues I have with HiTOP though. First, they haven't actually developed and published the scales, or even a concise and reliable description of them. For example, if you look for Big-5 scales, you will find that only extraversion and neuroticism are well-defined. The other dimensions aren't replicable. Just by listing Big-5 and not adding any caveats, it is clear that HiTOP isn't taking a critical view of these measures. In terms of actual, usable scales, there are just the ICD-11 and DSM-5 AMPD personality models, and combining these into a concise scale is active research. In this area, the HiTOP project has accomplished little so far besides drawing attention to these and other models. There is a 405-question battery https://hitop.unt.edu/clinical-tools/hitop-digital-assessmen..., but it hasn't been validated.

Second, I find the goals somewhat confused and the distinction between categorical and dimensional somewhat artificial. For example in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5811364/, the proposal is to have a number of traits and to rate their severity. This model isn't particularly different from the current DSM - it is just that now rather than a "diagnosis of autism" one is rated as having a "severe autism trait". It is possible to have multiple diagnoses in the DSM and similarly in the proposed model it is possible to have multiple traits. About the only real difference is that diagnoses are going to be redefined to be one level above, what could be termed a meta-diagnosis in the current DSM. This is presumably going to be more strictly trait-based, and the traits are going to be de-duplicated, so that there are fewer differential diagnoses to deal with. You can see the proposed grouping here: https://renaissance.stonybrookmedicine.edu/HITOP/AboutHiTOP. I don't see much issue with such groupings, but I also don't see it as a big change. Despite them saying it's a new framework that bears no relationship to the current one, I think all the current labels will still be around for a while, and it doesn't seem hard to fit all the DSM-5 labels into the new framework either as traits or as diagnoses (syndromes).
I'm not sure "people with negative msgs in tattoos died 14 years earlier" sheds light for me on the TFA.

TFA has a more direct, physical, concern - it starts from a well-known, that tattoo ink ends up in lymph nodes, and it does a statistical analysis showing there's a significant statistical result in lymphoma occurence.

I think people with negative tattoos dying younger reduces the # of people with tattoos who get lymphoma, as they have less ink-in-lymph-nodes years.
If I'm reading that article/pictures right (using Doubleclick Translate), it's claiming that when charging at 2.3kW, 5-15% of the power is going to the 12V system. So assuming 90% efficiency for the main power converter and 80% efficiency for the 12V converter, that's at least 6-20 amps of draw on the 12V bus? That seems quite high.

Premises wiring seems like a red herring. At least in the US, conductors are sized based on a maximum percentage voltage drop at rated current, which means the branch circuit losses should be similar when using either one at full capacity. (A lower current circuit for a longer time is actually going to be slightly more efficient because the feeders are fixed sizes)
1. Authenticate using signed JWTs at the edge via something like AWS API Gateway.
2. If the attacker is smart enough to use valid JWTs from IDPs. Find the JWTs that match the DDoS attack and ban those identities at the edge. This rate limits the attacker to how quickly they can generate new accounts on say gmail or azure.
3. If the attacker is can generate new accounts fast enough, add a bloom filter to the edge of accounts you have seen before the attack started.

At some point the attacker either gives us or just switches to the brute force of flooding the pipes with so much traffic that the AS doing the filtering goes down. At that point it is now someone else's problem. They might start de-peering the ASes generating the traffic.
The dotted quad notation is just a human readable notation. You can’t just add another octet willy nilly. That’s exactly what ipv6 did. They added an extra 12 octets, but used hex notation (0-F) to shorten the number of characters for human readability.

Internally, an IP is just a 32bit number. Adding another octet is adding another 8bits to the number. IPv6 merely expands that number to a 128bit number.

If you do the math of say converting 8.8.8.8 to 8256^3 + 8256^2 + 8256^1 + 8256^0 and ping the resulting number, it will work.
The problem isn't the mechanisms inside of JWT (though they are gross and worth avoiding on their own), it's the systems-level tradeoffs you have to make to use them idiomatically, particularly around refresh tokens and revocation.

If you read this and think "this doesn't apply as long as I have to use JWTs for some service I rely on, anyways", you missed its point.
The problems that Nix gives you are much nicer to have than the problems of tbe FHS absurdity.
Social media bosses are 'the largest dictators', says Nobel peace prize winner
The article misses the point of JWT: it's dead simple to implement.

I don't implement JWT because I fancy big data terascale technologies. I do it because it's mostly stateless, meaning it's very easy to mock locally, and easy to deploy.

> You wanted to implement log-out, so now you’re keeping an allowlist of valid JWTs, or a denylist of revoked JWTs. To check this you hit the database on each request.

No, you just remove the JWT from the local storage. Sure, the user could then relogin if he copied it, but if it's on his own will, why not. And if he got his JWT stolen before logout, bah anyway any token could have been stolen that way, whatever the tech.

> You need to be able to block users entirely, so you check a “user active” flag in the database. You hit the database on each request.

Right but that contradicts the whole premise of the article, being that you probably don't need fancy features. 99.9% of websites don't need to ban users _instantly_. If you have a fair JWT expiration, it's usually OK.

I'd argue for the exact opposite of the article. If you want dead simple Auth, without fancy tech, just use JWT.
Ah, for the companies with high technical control, but no technical competence! Of course :)
why would you need 175g of protein a day? stimulating mTOR?
Gloe: A lib to create readable and type-safe pipelines in Python
I see! For recent clang, the flag -Warray-bounds-pointer-arithmetic did the same thing for me. So if missing bounds checking for static arrays was your main gripe with C, you can rejoice.
Yeah, it would be pretty cool to generate or modify assets on-the-fly depending on the character's path. Maybe there's a karma system and the character is becoming more evil, which then applies a weight to the assets and makes the world darker/scarier.
Will this do any gui/X? (Didn’t see any mention on the site faq)

Also can it interact with the host microphone and play sounds thru host speaker etc?
Those response rates are fairly awful with two groups that are markedly different. Seems very likely that they’d self-select on the face of it especially if they knew what the research question was.
Musk's A.I. Firm Raises $6B in Race with Rivals
Technically Recall (Windows) and Rewind (Mac) are also both self-hosted and don't run on the cloud, but this one is open-source, I think that would be a bigger selling point.
The infinite does not necessarily contain everything. I would be surprised to find an even number in an infinite list of odd numbers. I would be even more surprised to find cantor’s diagonalized number in a list of rational numbers. And yet even more surprised to find Hamlet encoded within Pi.

Structure is still interesting.

In re: the non-causal alignment being even more astonishing - a simple argument to illustrate this is to ask- would you be more amazed if you threw 100 bouncy balls in a room, took a photo and they formed a perfect circle in mid air at that instant from that angle, or if you went and placed the marbles one by one in a perfect circle on the ground and took a photo?

The latter might be more meaningful, but the former is more miraculous - not in a religious sense of course, but just in the sense of the extraordinary unlikelihood of catching such a moment of chance alignment in noise, apophenic divinity, in how it seems to violate the second law, etc etc.

It might be instructive for you to try look up Piero Della Francesca’s method of generating perspective images from a point cloud (from the 14th century no less - he invented 3D face scanning then!) and try a few manual examples to really wrap your head around how difficult it would be for a perfect circle to emerge from a truly random point cloud.
Similar to the plot of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_(Baxter_novel)
Stateful services meaning the default way every web framework has structured a web application since 2005?
But is he doing research? Has he read on the Cosmological Principle? Maybe some reading on what standard deviation (5.2σ on this paper) is and what it means to things being naturally random? How about reading the original paper? The Discussion section makes it very, very clear how the scientists reached the conclusion and how the Big Ring is statistically significant -- and in the process literally answering OP's question.
It's pretty simple. If IPv6 headers were split into two parts, where the first part was the same as IPv4, and the second part had the rest of the bits, so you had say 8 octets instead of 4. The rest of the header would look like data to an IPv4 router.

So your IPv6 address would be 1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8. The header would have 5.6.7.8 as the IPv4 destination. When it got there, that router would unpack the rest of it and send it off to 1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8. If that host had to talk to an IPv4 host, it would just use the IPv4 headers.

Then IPv6 traffic could pass over IPv4 networks without any changes. The only constraint would be that each IPv6 network would have to have an IPv4 "gateway" address.

Old IPv4 hosts wouldn't be able to talk to IPv6 endpoints, but at least this way the user could upgrade their own stack without having to wait for their ISP, and every network in between, to also upgrade.

It's pretty much carrier grade NAT but from client to client without ISP support being necessary, which is the biggest bottleneck right now.
I wasn't thinking on the fly as much as reducing the effort to build scenes in the first place
what's the difference between login and logon?
This 2003 paper shows a very close match based on ESO Paranal observations:

https://www.eso.org/public/news/eso0307/

and this paper from 2016 also has very close mass estimation (see table 1)

https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2016/10/aa29201-...
are you working on that? it needs a stable-diffusion kind of breakthrough to achieve that.
It depends on the representation. SDFs can be pure mathematical functions, in which case there is no grid, or they can be a grid of values representing distances to the implicit surface, in which case they do use a grid. The latter representation, to my knowledge, is rarely used in 3d, but it is used in 2d for SDF fonts for example.
Show HN: Coding but Clueless about Marketing
Solopreneurs are going to start going after small SaaS's that employ 10-20 people which were built pre-chat GPT.

My thesis is there are niche products that don't have feature-sets which make sense for large teams,

and Solopreneur dev + ChatGPT will being usurping those products that have small teams once developers learn how to market, which they will do because ChatGPT frees up time for that as well.

So I'm making a YouTube channel, where I begin to learn how to market my own SaaS on reddit.

Thanks for looking!
Web-Logbook: EASA Web Pilot Logbook
You shouldn’t guess what they expect, you should say what you think is right, and why. Do you want to work at a company where you would fail an interview due to making a correct technical assessment? And even if the guess is right, as an interviewer I would be more impressed by an applicant that will give justified reasons for a different answer than what I expected.
> The article misses the point of JWT: it's dead simple to implement.

Implementing it securely, however, is far from dead simple.

https://scottarc.blog/2023/09/06/how-to-write-a-secure-jwt-l...
> and protons a negative one.

A "pro" negative? That introduces a whole new confusion.
Is it acceptable/allowable to do a grant application as a team of 2, or would each person need to submit individual applications even though the project is related?
I'm a happy Helix user and I'm curious what the benefit is of this over terminal-based Helix?
Or an eye. Almost.
They seem very focused on grid applications, yes. Beyond their key claim of a 10x cost advantage over lithium, it seems like they're only claiming the batteries will hold a charge for around a hundred hours: not at all good for long-term storage or devices, but perfectly reasonable for the grid.
"Identity" and "Access" are really good names.

I could easily adopt those if I find myself naming middleware again.