skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not here to support (or oppose) the war. I'm just noting that you left out a detail in your comment that a lot of people would feel is rather critical to the point.
Can you explain this point? I think you are trying to say the application would include an implementation of TCP? I don't see how this is related to memory.
Backblaze B2?
Yeah that's the point of the article really. The rest of special relativity remains intact though for subluminal particles, you still have Lorentz transforms and energy-mass equivalence and all that stuff.
SEND -->
SEND -->
<-- ACK
<-- ACK (this node was *suuuper* slow due to page thrashing.)

Don't try to "fix" it, either; there's no way to do that.

You make the job idempotent, in some manner: make it such that receiving the message and processing it twice is safe.

(This is what TFA eventually capitulates to, but tries to call it "exactly once delivery", even in cases where deliver is occurring more than once. I don't think this view is pedagogically useful, which is partly why we say "exactly once delivery is impossible.")
I should also add Beijing to this list:

- Beijing (BIDU: Baidu, JD: JD.com, BABA: Alibaba, TCEHY: Tencent, DIDI: DiDi, PDD: Pinduoduo, NIO: Nio) - Rapid development and modernization in central areas combined with core of political power contrasts with pollution, underdeveloped outskirts, and socio-economic disparity in peripheral districts.
This is accurate. Imagine if NSA paid FAANG people FAANG salaries how different the world might be.
They don’t sell user data for a very simple reason - it’s a crappy business, as you can charge much much more with to recurring sales for heavily obfuscated access to the data than just one off selling of said data.

When you think about it - initiatives are kind of aligned with user privacy (kind of, as there’s much more to the story than this simplistic point of view)
Yes, that is true. But why can't I choose to view "the system itself" as the thing that is on the other side of a de-duplicator?

It feels to me like an argument over whether or not humans can fly. An unassisted human cannot fly, but with some technological augmentation, they can. It seems a bit pedantic to deny that someone can fly from LA to New York simply because they have to get into an airplane to do it.
That meme died 30 years ago when 295 had a NSA entrance sign on the side of the road, this is so fucking tired.
As a commercial property, both their loan and sale price are contingent on the rental price.

So again, a disincentive to ever decrease rent (and thus demonstrate the market is softer and therefore you property is worth less).

Versus claiming it still commands higher rent (and is temporarily unrented) and thus more valuable.
So if you build systems using messaging middleware you get to choose upfront whether you are going to use XA with exactly-once semantics and pay the performance penalty for that or whether you will implement your business logic idempotently on processing instead.

You can do this across a whole landscape of vendors.

So this whole class of "that's impossible" responses sounds to me (as an ex-brick layer) like "obviously you can't stack bricks next to each other perfectly straightly - so building walls is clearly impossible".

So it feels a bit jarring when several vendors allow you to do this impossible thing.

Google for JMS and exactly-once and you can find documentation with several products on exactly how to do this.

One example:
https://www.atomikos.com/Blog/TheSimpleSecretOfExactlyOnceDe...
This used to be what brand was all about - that you could trust the brand to produce high-quality stuff because it was a quality brand. All Doc Marten boots were well-made and solid, would last a decade at least, because it was a quality brand and the price tag came with that.

I know what high quality looks like; I wore my first Doc Martens for a decade. I trusted the brand when revisiting my youth and buying a new pair.

It seems someone figured out that the price tag goes with the brand, not the quality. So you can charge high prices for cheap boots if you put the DM tag on them. And make bank.

I think this will accelerate, and the "new and upcoming" brands will get shit at exactly the point where people like me discover them. Because, as you say, it's not worth the effort to keep up with this rapid churn.

Hence the Inverse Vimes solution: stop trying to buy quality and instead accept that everything is shit and deal with that reality; buy cheap and often.
Is part of the reason patents / licensing issues with HEVC that makes it harder to adopt?
I turned off most GitHub emails and mostly use the Notification Centre for discovering things I need to know about. It's not entirely proof against phishing this way, but it doesn't get to use email to appear more legitimate.
I read somewhere about old ESET rules being in the macOS firewall blocked various udp traffic. Quick Google might get you more information.
> There’s a very famous photo of Obama, Biden, the Joint Chiefs, and National Security advisors in the White House Situation Room watching the raid unfold in real-time…

How convenient there was a photographer in the fucking situation room! Such a coincidence.
I'd be very careful with Kiwi. They don't have official OTA agreements with all the airlines they resell; at least Ryanair at one point was actively hostile towards them, and Kiwi was working with personal Ryanair accounts to get around their roadblocks. This in turn meant I couldn't access Ryanair's mobile boarding passes and had to find a printer on short notice at the airport.

While airlines can apparently not legally completely prevent such "uncooperative" third-party resellers, and I do have some sympathy for the business model, it's not great to be stuck between travel agent and airline when things go wrong.

Other OTAs like Experian actually take the role of a good old travel agent (the entity historically doing much of the ticketing work the airlines are now doing directly) and will usually only sell you itineraries of interlining (i.e. cooperating) airlines, and also only of airlines that accept travel agents as business partners in the first place.
All those give me a clear advantage in the long run. What’s the advantage for me with ipv6?
Perhaps the code associated with the touchpad has a priority greater than that you used to run cyclictest (80?). Does it still happen if you boost the priority of cyclictest to the highest possible, using the option:

--priority=99

Apply priority 99 with care to your own code. A tight endless loop with priority 99 will override pretty well everything else, so about the only way to escape will be to turn your computer off. Been there, done that :-)
> From the NSA, this seems like historical revisionism as it contradicts the bin Laden story widely accepted.

You just described counterintelligence propaganda.
"Liberal" as a political term is wholly unrelated to the original meaning of liberal arts though it's unsurprising that the two things are being conflated, even by people teaching at the college level.

"Ninety percent of everything is crap." Just because there are a lot of terrible liberal arts programs doesn't mean it can't be done well.

Try to not throw the baby out with the bath water while sorting this out for your personal edification.
For the article:

> Whilst I wouldn’t recommend remote team members having to endure a subpar experience, for example during the daily Kanban meeting, is that really a good reason to degrade the experience for the rest of the team, losing out on all the benefits that gathering around a physical board can bring?

Are they seriously proposing _physical kanban board_ as a viable alternative to JIRA? This got to be a joke, right?

(Checks post date, it's 2019... Ah, that explains it)
If lack of a successful ACK means you retry indefinitely until you do get an ACK, then whichever side handles deduplication need to store all observed messages indefinitely or you may deliver the same message more than once without correctly deduplicating it.

If instead you only store them for N days but an ongoing retry loop finally succeeds in N+1 days, you get duplicated delivery.

If a retry loop gives up after finite elapsed time, which sets a ceiling on how long you must retain observations, then you do not in fact achieve at-least-once delivery without using a lesser qualifying statement.

One of those constraints must be compromised on. That doesn't mean a practically useful implementation can't exist, it just means a theoretically ideal one can't without the infinite memory.

Many systems and real world processes would actually suffer negative consequences if a weeks-old payload was delivered-as-new, so hardly anyone balks at this part of the implications. But again, you have to redefine at least one of the claims (or acquire infinite memory) to have a coherent system that fulfills those claims.
> Once they introduce that, the texts will become more varied

I’ve said for some time that, while LLMs are varying levels of useful for a lot of people, it’s practically tailor made for spam and phishing. I can’t think of any “product-market-fit” as good as that.

For instance: Imagine combining a leak of personal data from your favorite data broker (who knew that this would come back and bite), with an LLM to bypass spam filters and perform phishing attacks with eerie believable social engineering behind it. All for next to no money.
Most iPhone users would be storing photos in iCloud.

And most professionals are storing their photos in Creative Cloud.

And in both cases the photo data would be replicated on multiple hard drives for redundancy. So it would definitely be more environmentally friendly to have smaller photos.

The more important reason is that cloud storage costs significantly more than local.
The government isn't shy about spending on defense, it is shy about spending on people. GS and GG pay scales aren't that great when compared to industry positions. Consider that GS-13 is often the max for SMEs in many engineering disciplines across the fed until you get into PhD territory (to stay technical, management roles more easily go up to GS-14/15). GS-14/15 if you're in cyber and somewhere like the NSA, maybe. And while that's better than GS-13, you're talking about capping at around $200k or a bit better in high cost of living areas with skills and clearances that could make you much more in industry.
What is environmentally (OK, mentally) unfriendly to me is the creation of new formats that various apps, and notably, websites where I post images, can't handle, so I swear a bit, convert the image to jpeg or png, and post.

People are part of the environment, too!

But lo! men have become the tools of their tools. ... Thoreau.
Would he? Any tips on sports gambling this week!?
I’ve been trying, for the past two days, to make it so that the layout in landscape mode doesn’t look like shit.

The only way to do that is to make the portrait layout look like shit.

Seems totally arbitrary how they line up the items in landscape mode.
$2000 is an insulting amount for such a huge vuln
Have you tried writing tests with an LLM?

Because I have, and it's not been the experience you're describing. The LLM hallucinated the error message it was testing for (that it had itself written 5 minutes earlier, in the file it had been given as the source to test).

I don't think this can be solved with the current methodology we're using to create these assistants. I remain arguably highly intelligent and definitely convinced that LLMs need to evolve more to surpass humans as coders.
And yet

> I wanted to inform you that the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) directed in August 2013 that the agency make no operational use of vaccination programs, which includes vaccination workers. Similarly, the Agency will not seek to obtain or exploit DNA or other genetic material acquired through such programs. This CIA policy applies worldwide and to U.S. and non-U.S. persons alike.

The CIA themselves recognizes such an approach as being bad overall.
Hmmm. Maybe this is the reason why the processing vs delivery distinction matters. Because my thought is, well of course: To fix that you only send the acknowledgement after processing succeeds.

But then again, once you do that, the processing code that is being wrapped really doesn't have to care about being idempotent anymore, as it is being handled a layer up. At that point, all it needs to care about is being atomic.

I'm not sure if it practically matters either way. I'd rather have my processing code be both atomic and idempotent regardless just to make things easier to reason about, as long as it's not too much of a burden. I've always been a fan of concepts like idempotency tokens.
Having arbitrary browser access would be pretty valuable, even for just a small number of users.
That is not the treatment for depression.

this argument reduces mental health to medication, which leaves aside everything from the history of mental health (asylums, witch burnings to today), leaps in medicine (from lobotomies, to SNRIs, bipolar meds and more), to simply better diagnoses.

There are certainly tons of people here who have benefited from mental health professionals - overextending the flaws in psych simply to dismiss the idea of a watchdog is several unsupported arguments too far.
The WH photographer is always around taking pictures of whatever the president is doing; it's literally their fulltime job.
The NSA does pay FAANG people FAANG salaries. It's just through private contractors, many of which you've never heard of.
If I'm being honest, "don't click links in email unless you were expecting that particular email message" seems easier for grandma than "update x, y, and z, and use Pihole" unless you want to administer her network and devices. But maybe you're saying that an iPad/Chromebook can mitigate all of the above needs? A little bit.

Anyway, while I haven't heard of any cases yet, it wouldn't surprise me if senders of phishing email someday manage to deliver messages shortly after detecting some traffic (DNS lookup?) that you legitimately make with the entity the email is spoofing. Then you're expecting it, roughly.
>This is why it’s best to stay out of it and watch from a safe distance. There is no right or wrong, good vs evil, victim and oppressor. It’s A vs B, cats vs dogs, my sports team vs your sports team.

It serves the interests of the US to have a reliable ally in the region. Previously to the US fracking revolution, Middle East oil was very important to the oil supply for US allies.

Of course now oil has less geopolitical importance and the US has no great interest in protecting Asian-European trade we'll see how far that partnership will continue.
Inconcievable. We live in a binary world. They didn’t deliver him hogtied on the Resolute Desk at 8am, so Land War In Central Asia was the only option.
> Or any subject, really

It isn't equivalent. Very, very few people manage to self-educate advanced math. But it's a lot easier with liberal arts.

Allow me to pose this question - does a literature degree enable one to write best selling books? Does JK Rowling have a degree in literature? In contrast, learning math and engineering enables one to use that knowledge to create great things. One has zero chance of building a successful liquid fuel rocket engine without that training.

I recall reading a lament by a literature professor who said he knew everything there was to know about Romeo and Juliet. He said he'd throw all that knowledge away for the joy of reading it for the first time.
> A 4 year old piece laying out the exact difference...

"Exactly-once delivery guarantee is the guarantee that a message can be delivered to a recipient once, and only once."

That seems circular to me.

Also, the author's proof is flawed. The 2GP requires more than exactly-once delivery, it requires common knowledge. It is not enough for the first general to know that the message will be received, it is required that the first general knows that the message has been received, and that the second general knows that the first general knows this, and that the first general knows that the second general knows... and so on.
This has happened for a while. In February of this year, the same attack vector was used in an attack to trick developers into thinking that they'd got a job offer from GitHub: https://www.xorlab.com/en/blog/phishing-on-github
It is only possible if the channel between your "abstraction layer" (call it another system, processing, etc) and your receiver is 100% reliable.
This is a massive understatement of how difficult finding someone like that actually is.
As this is a semantic debate over the definition of delivery, I asked my very non-technical wife if she thought in the scenario you described, the package was delivered exactly once. She said obviously not, and this discussion is very stupid, and I should stop participating in it. So there’s that.
You can get something similar from https://www.kayak.com/explore/ except the results are shown on a map rather than as a list: you specify an origin (and optionally a departure date) and the map shows price icons at all possible destinations.
>In this post we will show how [exactly once delivery] can be done, plus how simple it is with Atomikos. ...

>The producer should do its processing and send its message as part of a JTA/XA transaction. This ensures a message is sent if and only if the transaction commits. Any failures will result in rollback of the JTA/XA transaction - and no message will be sent. This means that failures can be safely retried until they succeed, without sending the resulting message more than once.

This is at-least-once (retries) with probably-idempotency: a transaction.

As I said: charlatans.

They're selling you "exactly once" in the headline, but clearly state that it is not exactly once in the legalese below. This is less "buyer beware" and more "blatantly false advertising", in exactly the same way as a free energy machine. The abstraction they're offering may indeed be useful, but "exactly once" is literally lying, and I wouldn't trust them to be honest elsewhere eit
First, there's an official position: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Official_White_House_Pho...

Secondly, why would it be a coincidence? You don't think... the people in the situation room knew something, perhaps a situation, was happening at the time?

Otherwise, why would they _be_ in the situation room? There's usually a situation going on.
Yes but now that it is possible I shouldn’t be spending half a day to do it. We’re on the verge of computers _finally_ becoming full blown assistants rather than just dumb tools that you have to painstakingly learn to use and then operate by hand, and people are saying we’re “done”. Just before computers are about to become dramatically more usable for people without “computer” skills.
One way I've heard is they don't book your ticket immediately but predict when the airline's price will go down and book in then. I imagine they have far better data to enable price prediction than the general public, and can spread the cost of getting it wrong over their other customers.
> Third party apps are not allowed by airlines to charge less than the airline

Technically true in that they can't undercut the airline on the same fare class.

But there are many different fare classes and some of them are only offered via 3rd parties, so you can often get much better deals via e.g., Expedia than you can by going direct to the airline.

Just this year my family flew Melbourne-Madrid then Milan-Melbourne, both legs on Cathay, but this route was only available on Expedia (and maybe other OTAs too, I don't remember) - all I know was that it was impossible to even search for this route on Cathay's own website. We didn't have any issues, but if we did I don't know if I'd worry about Expedia's customer service being much worse than an airline's own service.
> why can't I choose to view "the system itself" as the thing that is on the other side of a de-duplicator?

because the "de-duplicator" would either:

* be somewhere else on an unreliable network (in which case we have the same problem)

* be on the same machine (or in the same process) as "the system itself" (in which case from a distributed systems perspective makes it the same thing)

> It seems a bit pedantic...

It is pedantic. The only reason that these "delivery" rules are popular is because of how many times programmers have gotten it wrong. Mostly by making assumptions that either:

* the network is reliable

* the message queue (or whatever) will de-duplicate messages for me
Check out Jason Isabel and the 400 Unit’s cover of Metallica’s Sad But True.

Even if you’re not a Metallica fan, it’s a fannnnntastic song.
> That's a little sloppy

Yes, that is exactly my point. The only way you can make it non-sloppy is to define "delivery" as being something that happens exclusively upstream of deduping.
Hey, on a long enough timeline the answer will tend towards yes.

Do note, that this isn’t just an Americas problem.

Your data is probably on DBs in other nations.

Plus - the playbook is to target weaker nations and then use them for staging grounds to target stronger nations.
Frequency, network use, running unknown executables
Wow, tinyapps.org is still around? Having a nostalgia moment when I downloaded their curated apps onto my ZIP100 to try on my home computer running Windows 95.

And who still remembers analogx.com?
I got into cooking via Youtube. Youtube cooks became a thing about fifteen years ago. People like Jamie Oliver started promoting first themselves and then others on Youtube and I sort of started watching that stuff to relax. The genius of this was that Jamie Oliver was of course famous but the people he promoted weren't. They were just ordinary people that pointed a camera at themselves while they were cooking stuff. Quite a few of them are still on Youtube and have successful channels now. And of course others have come along. There are many thousands of people regularly uploading stuff. These days if I want to learn how to make something, Youtube is the first place to look.

It took me a ridiculously long time to realize that I could do some cooking myself. If you are a programmer (like me), my realization was that if I can follow instructions and implement some complex algorithm, cooking is a lot easier. And even the failures can be tasty.

Julia Childs was basically doing the same thing as these Youtube chefs but about half a century earlier. You can find quite a bit of her shows on Youtube. But it's got a similar vibe to it: shot at home, very passionate about what she did, very relatable, etc. And it necessarily follows a similar format. She was funny, and no-nonsense. Very unglamorous too. And obviously very skilled. She was a middle aged woman by the time she got on TV. It was all about the food and her character.

I can't say she was a huge influence for me because I never knew she existed until some Youtube chefs kept referring to her and I checked out some of her stuff.

Anyway, I loved the bit of information about her WW II career as a high level intelligence officer. Only makes her more awesome.
I literally went through this exact thought process with new control center today. Absolute nightmare.
The icons sizes all shrank significantly with no option to increase the size. Combined with a ton of space on either side of the icons, now they are icons are tiny, especially on an iPhone mini.

Also, no one expects a + icon to mean "organize". Sometimes the + icon is not even tappable due to other random stuff that gets jammed up there, like
And the new power button doesn't do anything when you tap it, only when you hold it. No feedback at all.

That said, I do appreciate the ability to move the icons anywhere (to put important ones closer to the bottom). Now, can we add the ability to add some of these to the lock screen without using 3rd party apps?
What's AMD's equivalent to Renderdoc these days?