skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Should also note that the "arrays are values" thing doesn't actually matter in practice. I've written a wide variety of go code in the last > 4 years and I can only think of two places I've used an array.
I'm not a US citizen please give my ignorance to this.
God I hate Aol.
Gracefully responding to angry issues opened in your repo
> This is flatly wrong. SRP stores serverside verifiers that are derived from plaintext passwords. Stealing an SRP verifier is equivalent to stealing a password hash.

I'm not wrong, you're just missing the point. The derivation process happens on the clients machine, so they get to 'chose', and verify, how it's performed, and can therefore ensure the KDF is extremely strong. The server doesn't need to know how it's strengthened and cannot, in fact, even discern if the verifier it sees is derived from a random value or through some purely deterministic process.

The objective here is to stop trusting the server with our passwords because they're prone to being lax, not prevent every conceivable technical attack from supercomputers from, and algorithms known only to, the NSA.

> Using SRP is, from the perspective of a compromised server, worse than using bcrypt.

First of all, you can use Bcrypt inside SRP, so the password cracking route is a wash. It's the same, by definition. Secondly, I never said SRP6a as currently specified is what we should use. I said a protocol like SRP and even put emphasis on like. Elliptic curves are the way to go for compactness and speed these days.

An attack on the verifier is going to be vastly less feasible than attacking the KDF. The current best algorithms for breaking a good asymmetric verifier would be many orders of magnitude more complex than just bruteforcing any real world password input, even if it's heavily strengthened with Bcrypt or Scrypt.

100ms of PBKDF2/SHA-256 on a modern server CPU gives you maybe ~20 bits of strenghening on top of a weak ass ~30-40 bit password. Scrypt will give you maybe ~16 more bits, with a sigificantly higher hardware (memory) cost. Total, that's still a long way off the ~120 bits achievable trying to solve the DLP on an elliptic curve. In the end, cracking that verifier is more expensive.
When We Lose Antibiotics, Here's Everything Else We'll Lose Too
... you say based on the zero Wall Street analysts who have gone to jail for doing what VC's do, but in other markets.
Agreed. It would have been more interesting if he'd developed his model/heuristic based on the first five or so books and then tested it on the remaining two to see if it held up.
It worked for playing MP3s, but once you had a collection of a certain size it didn't do a very good job of managing that collection, at least at the time I stopped using it. You'd double-click an MP3 or a playlist and it would completely forget about everything that was in there before. I got so sick of that.
Yes, I think the author also uses "sensible" in places where "sensitive" might be more appropriate.
I feel your pain, re. decent rhythm games.

Have you tried Sequence, though? I enjoyed that, and the story is nothing to sneeze at either.
Reminds me of every single presentation I've ever seen at a games developer conference. "Look at this awesome thing we did! The graph goes up and to the right! No, I can't tell you scale, methodology, other contributing factors or talk to statistical significance. But it's AMAZING, right?!"
I don't want to think about how many of the folks I've hired I wouldn't have had I watched over their shoulder as they were pressured to solve problems on my terms. I have a feeling that for many of them I'd have left such an exercise with the impression that they were complete idiots.

Many of my best team members weren't people that were so effective at solving computer science problems or even very effective in their editor (I'd actually cringe to watch some of them edit code) but knew when to ask questions of our client or have a theory of mind of our customer in order to know what to build and be able to self-direct.

Conversely, some of my least favorite colleagues would probably fare well in this, but they would tend to rabbit hole creating complex solutions to simple problems or the wrong problem.

Maybe the projects I work on aren't technical enough and overlap with politics too much, but I've never found a gig that wasn't like that.
Is that the typical case?

In Australia, although there's definitely a lot less VC money going around, I believe VC funded founders typically pay something closer to a stipend than an engineering salary. That seems pretty practical to me too - most founders don't need a 150k salary to get by, and you can make a million dollars go a lot further if you choose to pay yourself half that amount.
If the client can choose any mechanism it wants to create a verifier, the system you propose is (a) not SRP, as you concede, and (b) really just a clunkier way of doing 2FA†.

I like 2FA. Most people like 2FA. If you had started out by saying "passwords suck, the answer isn't bcrypt, it's 2FA", I'd have agreed with you. Instead, you said "SRP", which simply doesn't solve the problem you're purporting to solve.

† To see why: imagine your SRP-derived client-specified verifier generation protocol was adopted: you'd have three mainstream implementations (NSS, Safari, and Internet Explorer) based on passwords all of which would have the same security as simply doing scrypt on the serverside; the additional "win" of your proposal would be the oddball clients that did something other than scrypt, where SRP would give them a challenge-response framework they could layer their system on. Awesome. That's what 2FA systems do. And they don't rely on passwords at all.

If you're going to reimagine all of HTTP authentication, why on earth would you drag passwords along?
Author is not proposing "1 weird machine learning trick mathematicians HATE!"

They are encouraging non-maths people to give the basics a try even though it seems intimidating. And it worked on me, like some others in this thread my maths is shaky beyond diff calculus and my eyes glaze over when I see notation - but now I'd like to give this a whirl. I have no illusions that I will suddenly be an expert.
I hear that complaint, but I think that my kids are growing up more savvy regarding the tricks of advertisers because they've been exposed to them at such a young age.

I would definitely distinguish it from porn in that heavy sexuality is way too able to psychologically scar someone at a young age -- but learning that the Barbie in the commercial isn't as much fun to play with as the girls in the ad made it seem isn't a bad thing.
"... the way people naturally behave."

How is it that people "naturally" behave, exactly? Keep in mind that the way we behave in civilized society is a product of having been raised in civilized society. We have internalized social norms that have been codified into laws, and behave accordingly.

If you look at history, or at any place where the consequences of behavior are removed (e.g. the behavior of people to whom laws don't typically apply), you will find that for the most part, people often behave extremely poorly to each other. Indeed, you'll find that game theory and selfishness best predicts how people treat each other. Law of the jungle, and all that.
Firefox OS now 12% of phones in Venezuela, 9% in Colombia
I can't help but feel nervous every time the mouse moves to the top right of the screen, narrowly missing the "End Interview" button in the animation...

I'm sure there's the a confirmation dialog or something, but I'd be afraid of accidentally hanging up on the person the whole time.
I'm not people; I'm me. And, actually, I do know about it. Your use as an adjective was wrong as was explained in that link.

I have no interest in your "points". I don't care how you thought you were using it. I don't care that you think you were right. I really don't care about the whole thing at all. I simply told you where you were going wrong, so feel free to ignore it if you wish to remain wrong, but you were still wrong. Go learn something.
Perhaps the most critical problem: user serviceability is pretty much directly at-odds with compactness, form factor, lightweight...
Sounds like a classic cop out. I'd wager that my surroundings aren't terribly much worse than yours, but the difference is you'll have to work for 30 years more than me (if you're average), while I will be free to change my surroundings as often as I feel like. If you optimize for money and focus on long-term goals you can end up with a much higher quality of life overall.
Smart piece by someone not in tech, who respects the limits of technology development.
Thanks for this! I have added a paragraph on salting if you reload the page.
Ah, Wesley Willis...

Rock over London! Rock on Chicago!
Who Takes Massive Open Online Courses and Why?
Thanks! I have updated the article to include a paragraph on salting.
Startup Kateeva to super-size OLED TVs & cell phone screens for less
> Which one is considered the epitome of innovation?

Always been Tesla for me, and he invented a hell of a lot more than electric motors.
It's ONE DOLLAR per month. ONE DOLLAR! And it's only if you want the extra features. Would you rather have ads be inserted between your songs or something? The development of the app needs to be paid for one way or the other.
Mono ships with a C# REPL: http://www.mono-project.com/CsharpRepl

After using F# and having F# Interactive onhand, I cannot imagine working without a REPL. There's so many small things that become simple to check if you've got a REPL handy.
Props for using a Wikipedia cite. At least when I was in school, you couldn't cite an encyclopedia as a reference, and that was when they cost money and were written by scholars. So lets look at the patent doctrine [0].

The definition of an invention by the USPTO is not simply something new. In a nutshell, it needs to be novel (no prior art), non-obvious to someone skilled in the art, and not a simple combination of existing things. Making a new algo or something run and scale faster is not inherently an invention. Sadly, while a ban algorithms (mathematical forumulae) and the non-obvious requirement are in the patent doctrine, the courts have set precedents in the recent decades to allow the current software patents despite the classic interpretation that these things were not patentable.

Indeed folks are taking this current contorted patent doctrine and conflating "invention" with "innovation", bestowing on their innovative new WordPress theme the greatness of an actual patent. Sadly, much of the difficult stuff going on in the startups would not have been a patent in 1950. But if we want to focus on the "feel good" version of invention, where it's new to you, then there is a ton of "innovation" going on. FB might be scaling and have a ton of technology to do so, but the net result of being able to share cat videos faster than a decade ago isn't pushing civilization forward the same way the killer patents of the 20th century did.

[0] http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/mpep-9015-appx-l.h...
You’ve Landed the Software Developer Job of Your Dreams – Now What?
Microsoft Now Sells T-Shirts That Claim Google’s Chrome Steals Your Data
5 Tips For Building A Productive Team
Indeed. Back in the now-lamented good ol' days of build-it-yourself PCs, I recall learning that Intel made all their Pentium processors exactly the same, artificially limited the clock speed on some, and sold them cheaper. So the difference in manufacturing cost between, say, a 400 MHz processor and a 433 MHz processor was exactly $0, but somehow nobody seemed to get quite so up in arms about paying more for the extra value.
As for why everyone stayed compatible with each other

Because markets have momentum. When a hundred thousand people have IBM compatible PCs, making your part IBM compatible opens the door to an already-established customer base.

In simple terms, why does nearly every accessory interface via USB these days? Because just about everyone has a USB-compatible computer.
1. You could say that about any course... Statistics comes to mind.

2. The original justification was "everyone should learn basic reasoning". You just turned it into "kick out people who can't learn it, cause screw those guys".
Doesn't automobile crash data exist somewhere in the public record? Couldn't someone ostensibly run statistical significance tests to measure the success/failure rates? I haven't seen any real analysis on the subject based on available data, but I imagine that with 19K+ cars having driven tens or hundreds of millions of miles, that we do have a good amount of data to make it worth it to investigate. Right?
Microsoft wants to sell you anti-Google mugs and t-shirts
They are seriously less insecure by design than Windows.

http://philosecurity.org/2009/01/12/interview-with-an-adware...

Don't tell me you aren't familiar with this.
It's actually incredibly hard, especially if you want to achieve better results than with a current 'gold standard' technique/algorithm, applied on your particular problem.

While the article doesn't have this title (why would you even choose one with such a high bias?), I presume the submitter decided upon this title after being encouraged by this affirmation of the article's author: 'This data indicates that the skills necessary to be a data “wizard” can be learned in disciplines other than computer sciences and mathematics.'.

This is a half-baked conclusion. I'd reason most Kaggle participants are first of all, machine learning fans, either professionals or 'amateurs' with no formal qualifications, having studied it as a hobby. I doubt people with a degree in cognitive sciences or otherwise in the 'other' categories as mentioned in the article learned enough just through their university studies to readily be able to jump into machine learning.
Here's a longer write up on the hardware involved and thinking behind it. It's linked from the article but I thought this explained it better.

http://blog.nytlabs.com/2013/11/05/diff-a-live-comparator-fo...
Django Creator Adrian Holovaty On Turning Data Into Opportunity
Aaaaand here's a clone of the Skin / Plugin section from the winamp website: http://winamp.dpedu.io/

Skins are coming soon, they're still scraping :)
January - but probably only support for abstract rendering for scatter plots and line plots. we'll have to roll it out incrementally, but the good thing is 90% of plots are scatters and lines =)
Recreating the core Instagram experience is directly against the ToS for the Instagram API.
Nice, just the other day I used NSAssert in C function and got weird crash on self.
You can no longer just leave Syracuse airport [video]
This doesn't directly answer your question, but in regards to seaborn, our goal is to support enough of the mpl API so we can get seaborn to work with bokeh. Either that or we would write our own ggplot interface. Which ever approach ends up being easier
It's partly that. It's also worth noting how many ways you can be on the wrong end. "I'm not black," is a legitimate form of reasoning on how you wouldn't be hurt by American slavery, but that doesn't actually express how you're still on the short end of the stick because it turns out you're Chinese or Irish.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/05/news/economy/postal_service_...

"a congressional mandate to prefund retirement health care benefits"

I'm not saying that's a bad idea in isolation. However if you're trying to make a political point that your enemy is a failure, merely force your enemy to do something sensible that no one else is forced to do, then when that destroys them, you can blame them for it, or something like that.

That was just round one. Here's round two of how to destroy the USPS, done in two simple quotes from the same story:

"In addition, it would give access to another $10 billion loan backed up by Postal Service property, which would have to be sold a decade later to pay off that loan."

"And individual Democrats and Republicans are united in their effort to prevent their own neighborhood post office or postal plant from closing."

Ta da! We require you to take out a loan, which you need because we forbid you from managing your own business, furthermore we also specifically forbid you to repay the loan. I'm sure nothing bad could happen in that situation LOL. I give 100% odds that this scheme will hit the fan as "proof of usps and bureaucrat mismanagement" when it is actually 100% the fault of congress meddling, of which at about 50% are trying to manufacture a political point to fit a predetermined agenda.

The problem with meaningless sloganeering is even if a slogan is generally correct, there will of course be outliers in opposition. This seems to be the case with the USPS. It would seem that blind faith based belief is so weak, the only way to enforce conformity is to intentionally sabotage a minor outlier.

The TLDR is they're being set up. (Edited to add, its the old game of take away authority needed to succeed, while leaving behind the responsibility of resulting failure. For a .gov, the USPS is actually pretty well managed, which is why its being targetted).
Companies hiring other companies to do ports is commonplace in the industry. Such companies aren't usually limited to doing only PC ports (sometimes it will be a company that also releases its own original games as well).
It would be interesting to see some performance numbers vs other key-value databases. It would slower but still it would be great to see what impact it has.
A Terrain Minimap with SlimDX and DirectX 11
I think this definitely has potential, but there are a few issues:

Is this only for searching/displaying courses, or is this used for registration also? If it's the latter, this is mission critical software for big enterprises. Price accordingly.

Even if you're only searching/displaying courses, I think your pricing is way too low. Selling a solution to an entire university is going to be expensive. Probably more than a year of revenue at your top-line price.

Maybe you should target individual departments within a university for the service if you want to continue at these price points. However, I think you should ditch the High School offering price. Maybe a <1000 tier, a <5000 tier and a >5000 tier.

I think what you really need to figure out is who are you trying to sell this to, and more importantly, how much it's going to cost to sell to them. That should really influence your pricing strategy. I wouldn't write another line of code until you figure this out.

Good luck!
And if they just "stay the course", then the next generation won't think anything about it -- it'll just be par for the course, similar to how random DUI stops work now, which are a warrantless invasion of one's privacy without grounds.

The problem is that nobody really fought that fight, because to do so would have been a defense of drunk drivers, basically. Now DUI checkpoints are commonplace (though some areas are making progress), and things like Stop & Frisk are only problems for those affected.

"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." — HL Mencken
> And if you're going to lampoon anyone who uses "ill-gotten" wealth for philanthropy... I can't see how you'll ever be happy. People do or supervise things you consider "evil," then they turn around and work charitably, but no -- it's gotta be squeaky clean all the way down?

Good deeds don't erase past bad deeds. No amount of charity with a fortune you earned being bad makes you a good person or absolves you of past wrongs.
Is k-means really what people are doing in serious production machine-learning settings? In a previous job, we did k-means clustering to identify groups of similar hosts on networks; we didn't call it "machine learning", but rather just "statistical clustering". I had always assumed the anomaly models we worked with were far simpler than what machine learning systems do; they seemed unworthy even of the term "mathematical models".
> “Wikipedia is written by a whole bunch of people who don’t know what they’re talking about. But it turns out that collectively, a bunch of people who don’t know what they’re talking about know more than one person who spent their lifetime researching it.”

This immediately brought to mind this article: http://jsomers.net/blog/it-turns-out. I mean it vividly popped into my brain because of the utter nonsense of this claim.

It doesn't turn out that an army of ignorants knows more than an expert. What turns out is that free trumps paid, and (perhaps surprisingly) can muster an enormous army of manpower, which in turn leads to a comprehensiveness that is unattainable by a traditional monetary business model. I mean you don't need to look very far to find factual inaccuracies and indeed slander on Wikipedia that can not be fixed because the rules are not oriented towards truth. So to draw the vacuous conclusion that Wikipedia won because its articles were better than Britannica belies a sort of willful ignorance about how the world works.

That's not say doing an end run around overly comfortable gatekeepers isn't a good thing in general, but man what a braindead quote.
I have a little experience in industrial control systems. Near as I can tell, both support and demand in the industry for controlling these devices with anything but Windows XP is basically nonexistent. Support for Windows 7 seems half-hearted at best, even now, when XP is nearly EOL. The package I have used the most, GE iFix, is so tightly tied in with Microsoft technologies, including OPC, DCOM, VBA, and ActiveX, that it's tough to imagine a port to anything else happening anytime soon. If you're interested in the industry, look up info on this, and stuff like Wonderware.

Most of the people working on these devices are far from being computer experts. I went to an advanced class for them, where the instructor took pains to advise the class that it was an advanced class and you would probably be lost if you hadn't taken the beginner class. I hadn't, and I breezed right through all of their material. Not that I'm that much smarter than anyone there, just from having experience using and figuring out a lot of different types of computer systems. This type of software is made for people who are experts in stuff like chemical plant operations, but who think Excel would be a great way to program their control systems. I'd bet that not one of them have even heard of the Nataz attack.

Given the total lack of interest or experience in computer security that seems to be prevalent in the industry, I expect it will get a lot worse before it gets better.
Wait till you have to hand craft your algorithms because the off the shelf ones are too slow ;). In the end you can stand on the shoulders of giants all day, but until you actually sit down and write an SVM or even something more cutting edge like stacked deep autoencoders yourself, machine learning isn't "easy".

In the end, libs are there for simpler use cases or educational purposes. Realistically, that's more than good enough for 90% of people.

That being said, it's not impossible to learn. Oversimplifying the statistics, tuning, and work that goes in to these algorithms you're using though? Not a good idea.
If a government entity was willing to pay for 0-day exploits to target a specific system and infrastructure I don't think it really mattered what OS was behind the controllers since they'd be building the super-virus to the needs of the assignment.
I could never trust a person who tried to sell me a 'vision' for money.
Already finishing up pulling the whole site into a warc/cdx and getting it to textfiles.com (aka ArchiveTeam).