skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
HBase never needed nor used append. "Append" refers to the ability to reopen an existing file from a new client and append data to it.
HBase writes only immutable files, which means they are written once then only read. Even the WAL is no exception; it is written once, and then only opened for read when needed for recovery or replication.

HBase needs hflush to make sure that the WAL edits are resident at at least 3 (default) HDFS data node machines.

Not sure how exactly grand parent lost data. Each edit is first written to the WAL then committed to the in memory store. The in memory store is flushed to disk into a new file at a certain size.
If a server crashes and had unflushed data in the memory store that part of the data is replayed from the WAL on another server.

See also here: http://hadoop-hbase.blogspot.com/2012/05/hbase-hdfs-and-dura...
Stop Watching Us – Find a Viewing Party or Satellite Protest Near You
I have found this issue only with CPython 3.3.2. 2.7.5 seems to work fine.
BBM Could Be Worth Billions If BlackBerry Can Copy The LINE Playbook
Just when most people think BB will not survive.... BB has found a new way to survive.
My Disastrous Interview at BitTorrent
This brilliant professor of yours should not have a problem following a few simple rules that a repair technician can and everyone else abides to.

> he's the editor that Wikipedia desperately needs to attract

If those editors require special care and exemption from the rules on the account of their fancy credentials, they're certainly not the type for Wikipedia.

One of those examples is ISL the physicist here in the comments. He complains that his contribution got edited by someone else. And that he doesn't get compensated for his hard work on the wiki. I'm sure he's a smart fella, but this attitude is not compatible with the Wikipedia model.
Thanks for the update. What other offers have you passed on?
But what if single core performance increases stop completely? In that case, parallelism wins out in the end as you keep adding more and more cores, given a problem amenable to parallelism.
Digg, Myspace, BitTorrent, etc... at varying degrees were all able to monetize users and made millions upon millions of dollars while doing so. In fact, this answer from the founder of BitTorrent is to my point.

http://www.quora.com/How-profitable-is-BitTorrent-Inc

"Our main source of revenue is off the toolbars we push out, which isn't a great source of monetization, but it's something. You can do the math on how many installs we have and what the monetization of toolbars is, and subtract out the costs of having 50 employees, and you'll get a reasonable ballpark of how profitable we are, although the short answer is very. Even lousy monetization works well when you have more users than Twitter."
> First because the probablity distribution itself would have to be pulled out of thin air, and make the results questionable.

All aspects of financial forecasting in the initial stages are pulled out of thin air and are hence questionable. This is one of the big uncertainties one lives with when starting a business.

> Third (and main) because you don't particularly need the actual outcomes at all,

Bingo. That's the key. What you are looking for is not "will my business succeed" but rather "what do I have to do in order to succeed?" The tweaking of the model is the point, not the outcomes.
I really want to make this run Node...
Could you make any recommendations on other items worth reading?
Why would I have my bot fill them in? One glance at the site and I know that my bot should skip those fields.
Bots frequently exploit changes that were recently fixed upstream. Not perhaps 0-days, but maybe a couple days after the original fix. How up-to-date do you really keep your SSH server? On the off chance the attacker gets to an exploit faster than you get around to updating your machine, then keys won't keep you safe. Using a non-standard port in that scenario might very well save you from the botnets, if the GP's argument about the dimensionality of attacks is correct.
Added this to a gist - https://gist.github.com/jcutrell/7165336 - might would be useful if someone could get this to the place where it's highlighting properly (me or anyone who wants to fork). I'd like to learn from this, but I don't really know where to start, so I figured taking it to a public-ish place might help that happen (if this isn't a good practice, someone please do let me know).
If you want to slow someone down you add in a delay. Like many forum software already does.
That's actually exactly what happens. Co-op programs are huge in Québec and that's a good thing. Government jobs usually pay 30-40% less and most of the time the less skilled students end up doing their co-op(s)/internship(s) there.
It's perfectly practical. GIMP did exactly that for years. The 2.8 release notes[1] mention removing the warning now that save and export are separate.

The stated goal was to make it harder (still? I guess people clicked through the warning without reading) to accidentally save in .png or .jpg and lose the layers. But the result, for someone whose usual workflow is to open a .png/.jpg, edit, and save back to .png/.jpg, could not be more user-hostile and obnoxious.

In response to a complaint, someone on the forums wrote[2]:

> This is the way Gimp now works. Of course you can consider this a PITA. But for other folks, losing work because they saved as JPG instead of XCF is also a PITA. The philosophy is that people that are impacted negatively by this change are people with very simple work-flows who would be better off using simpler software (XnView, Digikam, Lighttable...)

In other words, all of you people with simple workflows, that worked just fine in Gimp for years? Now you have to go off and learn some new software, because Gimp is for Serious Graphic Design™ only. Ugh.

I got excited researching this because I found a changelog for Gimp 2.8.4 that mentions patching the behavior to be sane[3], but then I realized that's only a patch in the unofficial OS X build. On Linux, the same nonsense in the latest version.

1. http://www.gimp.org/release-notes/gimp-2.8.html

2. http://registry.gimp.org/node/26273

3. http://gimp.lisanet.de/Website/News/Eintrage/2013/3/21_GIMP_...
My college has some combination course/forum software (Canvas, if you want to know). The only forum thread ( for my CS class was started by yours truly, and there are no replies. It's possible that other people use the private message system, and we look at the site to get assignments, but that's about it. I had a friend tell me about a class she took where forum participation was mandatory (with quotas for various actions), resulting in the predictable phoniness. The forum for my accounting class has no activity whatsoever.

So essentially, no one uses it as a social tool. I doubt young children would be that interested either. It would be hard to take seriously as a "fall back", either. The real fall-back is email and SMS.
One of my friends very young girls are black. My friend is raising them to be geeks and the girls are unhappy about how few super heroes look like them. Without programs like this, presumably their distress will extend to other areas as they grow older. Kudos to Kimberly for starting this.
True. However, it's the what people hear part that is the goal. Hence, from a PR standpoint, it's quite effective.
The non root user issue is invalid. While I can start an ssh-like service on port 2222 as a non root user, I cannot read the private ssh server key owned by root. If the sshd got switched to one run by an unprivileged attacker, you would get a bad server fingerprint and not connect (you wouldn't, right?).
That reference # is a sign that it's hosted on Akamai.

$ dnsname 23.6.100.226
a23-6-100-226.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com
> But instead they feel motivated to work for a big company on long-term useless problems.

I remember this opinion also surfacing with the Steve Yegge OSCON 2011 presentation[1]. In which he complained about Google, and all the hard working people there, focusing on social media instead of hard problems. There was a good discussion as to why these problems are not in the forefront.

[1] http://youtu.be/vKmQW_Nkfk8?t=5m47s

Subsequent discussion:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2811818

http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2011/07/hacker-news-fires-st...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2814032
Medium quietly opens to all, requires Twitter to join
They were too busy using Drupal.
More of a Freudian slip I thought.
The level of inflation is mostly a monetary matter; the 70s inflation also had some nasty oil-shocks that complicated things. Fiscal policy (anything related to the budget) doesn't have a much of a direct effect on inflation.

The Volcker Fed stopped the inflation of the US and Volcker was hired by... Carter. Also as you can see inflation was already 11 percent two years before Carter. The main person who is responsible for mismanaging inflation was Fed Chairman Burns (1970-1978).
The comic, while one of the more notable ones to me, dismissed the issue that the act is subversive, and that's what is important in the case of hackers taking down a website. Furthermore, it downplays the significance somewhat. Graffiti on the white house or pentagon would likely make it to the news.
> Setting up the malicious executable to somehow bind to the SSH port before the SSH daemon is able to and then rebooting the computer - assuming the user has reboot privileges - seems to be the only way to do this correct?

Not necessarily. You wouldn't necessarily need reboot privileges, you could just wait until root reboots the machine for whatever unrelated reason (e.g. kernel update). And you could do the same thing with the daemon: Wait until some updated version of the daemon is released and when root is installing it there will be a race starting when the old version exits before the new version starts and binds the port.

You're also just causing trouble for yourself because then you have to worry about a bunch of arcana like whether the daemon is using SO_REUSEADDR, IPV6_V6ONLY, only binding to the IPv4 address when the machine is dual stack, etc.
I think the other side of the problem though is that if you can still get 100X performance from what we have today, but it costs 100X in power, you will still have a problem where few can really use it. Consider phones as one data point. Even quadrupling the power draw will make the chips unsuitable for use.
You are not Alone (A Twitter Success Story in the Making)
I've even been trying various powder things that nutritional shops sell. They all leave me feeling hungry after an hour and I end up eating a sandwich anyway. :/
Because moving your port has an opportunity cost.

Documenting and configuring it has a non-zero cost which could be spent doing something else more impactful.

I've never seen an infrastructure where there was a sufficiently advanced state of security such that obscuring the port numbers of services was the at top of the todo list.

Unless people recommending these things work for shadow organizations I've never heard of, I'm pretty sure it's something done without any kind of cost-benefit analysis.

What are the odds of a SSHd zero-day? Or, more specifically, what are the odds that someone with zero-day knowledge would be so stupid as to decide to risk the vulnerability being discovered by others by using it in a horizontal search of all running SSHds?

Because it has to both be more likely than any other attack that could be mitigated (and port obscurity would have to be the most effective solution) with the same effort.

Pretty sure that for virtually all infrastructures, auditing that your systems are properly isolated, users and services have the least privilege possible prevent massively more probable attacks, and that firewalling services or port knocking or really anything are more effective solutions for this attack.
It's meant as a defense against non-targeted bots—the ones that roam the web looking for forms to fill out.

I think that's where the issue lies: these tools do different things. Honeypot fields defend against general bots. Captchas defend against specific bots, too, but also have greater friction, so are only used when specific bots are an issue.
> OpenSSH is I guess the most secure daemon on all your servers.

Probably correct. However, sshd should be the only public facing daemon that hasn't dropped root privileges immediately after binding to its privileged port.

So it should be the only daemon that can directly offer root privs to an attacker.

I say "should" because it's a big world out there and people do some bizarre and indefensible things. Sometimes merely lazy things, but the net effect is the same.
I don't see what moving it to 2222 does that turning off password authentication, requiring public key authentication disallowing remote root login, and fail2banning repeated login attempts doesn't.. Is there a vulnerability in SSH or our asymmetric key cryptography that I don't know about(other than the one possibly introduced to the random number generator)? If there is, is the NSA less likely to use 2222 to knock on our door than 22? The only thing - the only thing - that moving it to 2222 does is reduce load avg due to brute force botnet attacks. And banning ips after 3 failed connection attempts should have a similar effect on the load avg. That is the only benefit. If you ask me that benefit isn't enough for me to give up the time spent typing -p 2222 every time i run the ssh command.
From a game theory perspective, if an adversary has an effective tool, defeating that tool and creating enough doubt that the adversary no longer uses the tool are equivalent.

The major vulnerabilities sound like details of implementation alone. Then there is a difference between the more easily lost privacy and the less easily lost anonymity.

Finally, people who are actual experts seem to think it remains a tool for anonymity, and explain why in a credible way.
"Less than an hour" is with gigabit internet, which is rare for an attacker to have.
I think you mean high latency.
So really the only problem you had with the argument is the security via obscurity? Yeah, me too. Otherwise, his point were spot on and you didn't address them directly.
The way you describe it, it could work in theory. But kids (humans) don't wanna feel like all their thoughts are going to be scrutinized by someone above them and possibly punished. Remember when you'd have secret agreements (pinky swear!) with friends about things that would get you in trouble with mom? Yeah.
I'm curious if that is a function of how Facebook works or if that is what naturally happens when you see everyone you know online doing fun things (which would apply to every social network of that size).
How to Optimize Your Mac for Gaming
Indeed, and even if you haven't followed Egyptian history, you probably would be familiar with his wife Nefertiti (of the famous bust http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Nof... ) and his son Tutankhamun (who reversed much of Akhenaten's changes).
Only as a fallback if nsa.gov doesn't resolve. In this case, nsa.gov and www.nsa.gov resolve to different ip addresses. domain.com and www.domain.com are not the same thing. One is usually configured to redirect to the other, and DNS is often the same, but it doesn't have to be.
> you get it from verifying host keys.

You might be surprised how often StrictHostKeyChecking is no. Are you checking it on your active installs?
http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/25/michelle-obamas-princeton-...
It's Google Island!

www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2013/05/on-google-island/‎
There are two important points the comments are somewhat missing:

On a chip there is now lots of redundancy to ensure chip functions correctly. This gets worse as variation at smaller geometries increases. So over margining because no one wants another floating point bug.

Design effort and cost is a huge issue too. Margins at chip companies are shrinking - design automation license costs, large runtimes and much more difficult verification process from design to fab to test.

A new programming paradigm where there is a certain probability of error can be tolerated should go a long way in making the underlying hardware much more efficient.
Infuriatingly accurate.
No. The browser might fall back to www.nsa.gov if it's cached, but if you were to clear out that site from your cache, it'll keep trying to look up nsa.gov.
One option, if you can afford it, is to freeze your own eggs. It's costly but is probably a better option than having kids before you really want to.
Indian teenager commits suicide after parents told her to stop using Facebook
NSA denies DOS attack on their website
Even if water was scarce in the US, it wouldn't be a problem in the US, at least in terms of residential use. Desalination costs less than a dollar per cubic meter, and a quick calculation based on existing pipelines gives me a price of about half a dollar to pipe that a thousand miles.

For comparison, water today, where I live, costs slightly under a dollar per cubic meter. So even if my calculation was off by an order of magnitude, desalinated water would be a reasonable option for all US households, well under other budget items like cost of food.

Industry that depends on cheap water might be different, but how much of that is stuck in places without good water supply?
Entangled toy universe shows time may be an illusion
It's more of an annoyance. If you require password based login, port 22 will lead to constant attempts that fill the logs. Move to any other port,and you'll see none.
And use sshguard, because the only thing you should care on a secured host is power consumption. One of my boxes went to 33% on all CPU threads during a sk attack.
“If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what.”
- Barack Obama
Perelman as an example not famous and non-notable? Wow, I am stuggling to think of a more famous or notable mathematician alive on the planet today.
> To be fair, you could get the advantages of both by running SSH on a different privileged port than 22.

ephemeral port range are a tunable at least on FreeBSD. However tuning stuff like this is fraught with disaster consider how difficult it is to guess an ssh password vs all things that can go wrong when changing sshd's listening port. But do it if you want, I bill by the hour.

galacticdominator% sysctl net.inet.ip.portrange
net.inet.ip.portrange.randomtime: 45
net.inet.ip.portrange.randomcps: 10
net.inet.ip.portrange.randomized: 1
net.inet.ip.portrange.reservedlow: 0
net.inet.ip.portrange.reservedhigh: 1023
net.inet.ip.portrange.hilast: 65535
net.inet.ip.portrange.hifirst: 49152
net.inet.ip.portrange.last: 65535
net.inet.ip.portrange.first: 10000
net.inet.ip.portrange.lowlast: 600
net.inet.ip.portrange.lowfirst: 1023
Seems to work well enough for Spotify.
If you think the government is one coherent entity with all of them wanting to become Big Brother, you are wrong. The fact that Tor gets its funding from the US government is irrelevant. The source code is out there for you to see and inspect and has been done so by many researchers from universities around the world.

Example: The NIST openly went against NSA.
No, I meant low latency because it allows timing analysis if you control the first and the last node.
Basically they asked the NSA which knew how to tap the blackberrys and other mobile devices of 35+ other world leaders.
It likely can't be justified on power and real estate costs alone. There are counties in Oregon that give away land and provide very cheap hydro power for data centers.
Andrew Wiles, Alexander Grothendieck to name a few.
Looks like they already offer this, but only for new customers. I pay $65 per month for ~25 Mbps of broadband, but with this newer plan it'd be $70 with the same broadband service but comes with 10 basic channels plus HBO. I'd be totally up for that but it's only for new customers, I have no idea why. I don't feel like calling to find out.

http://twitter.com/Funkmon/status/393963445491494912/photo/1
> The ability for someone to "spin up a daemon on your server" would also be called an unprivileged exploit.

No, that is very, very wrong. This is SOP for an account on a system

nc -l 9000 <- spinning up a daemon on your server
Nanoscale structures could be used to control the Casimir effect
> Graffiti on the white house or pentagon would likely make it to the news.

Still not in the same league. Tagging the white house or pentagon would mean breaching a secure perimeter, whereas this was probably just a minor inconvenience to a sysadmin somewhere for a couple of hours. Nobody would have to assure the public that the President's life was never in danger because someone took down the white house's website. Sneak close enough to touch the windows and survive and it's a different story.
Some people don't know how to configure DNS.
a: $port != 22 is enough to thwart most bots and skiddies.
If you think the port number is a guarantee that you are
safe or that you are communicating with a blessed ssh you
are sadly mistaken.

b: Uhh the port number means nothing.
Host keys are there for a reason... Someone does not
understand the functions of SSH.
http://www.snailbook.com/ <- great book

c: If you are not investigating fingerprint issues when
logging in via SSH and you call yourself a sysadmin,
please stop. You are going to be the reason your company
ends up in the news because your shit got owned and
2,000,000 user account hashes were leaked blah blah.

d: If you are not using key based auth and you have a fly
by night keystore policy. Which means you have a
keystore - stop. The whole keystore for SSH shit
irritates me. I cannot tell you how many times I have
heard sysadmins say a that a single private key is a
"best practice". It is not a best practice it is a
stupid practice and really prevents you from protecting
unauthorized logins on other machines for the obvious
reasons.

Put your public keys on bitbucket.com or source
management. Put your private keys on an encrypted disk
in an encrypted archive if you must. This is still dumb
imho because it is not needed.

Leave one account (root) with console only/no ssh access
that will allow for keys to be revoked/recreated when
users need new keys.

e: The original article http://www.adayinthelifeof.nl/2012/03/12/why-putting-ssh-on-...
Is wrong and misguided. port knocking or knockd is an
obscurity measure, precisely the kind he argues against.
The linked article from the OP calls this out.

f: Spinning up daemons is a big deal for non-priv users?
So spinning up a remotely accessible Lisp out of emacs
from a screen that is running in the background is bad?
Hmm, here I thought that computers were meant to be tools
for humans to get work done... Sorry, background processes
are part of getting shit done. Users should be able to spin
up the stuff they want to spin up in the network segments
they have access to without the bureaucracy of misguided
fools making the jobs of others more difficult because
they think spinning up a gunicorn process or a custom daemon
is worse than their unpatched kernel, apache tomcat and mysql
listening on a publicly accessible address. Stateful firewalls
and hosts allow/deny are there for a reason.

Sorry for the snarky reply here but there are a lot of people
chiming in that obviously have very little knowledge about
managing *nix ops and remote access. I have pretty strong opinions
about this kind of stuff. Especially the single key stupidity and
not checking host fingerprints.
Can you break my home rolled encryption?
OMG   Tyrin Harris NASTY THROW DOWN
The Threat of Artificial Intelligence
asciidoc can do everything author is calling for in scholarly markdown

http://www.methods.co.nz/asciidoc/
Maybe it's for temporary maintenance as they ready the public for exciting and scandalous new wiretapping targets.
I didn't say Map-Reduce was based on machine leaning (nor vice-versa).