skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not sure if the issue is related to bulb quality but I don't like the temperature/color of most LED lighting I see here in India and somehow it feels a little feeble like tubelights do sometimes.
Moonlight towers: light pollution in the 1800s
> Is it not trivial to run multiple C compilers in different processes?

I think the design doc is talking about using shared-memory concurrency to do parallel codegen on a per-function basis (like some LLVM patches are experimenting with doing). In this regard it's easier to set up the infrastructure needed to farm out concurrent tasks in Go, because C has neither built-in channels nor the generics to conveniently build them.
Edit: reading this a few hours later, obviously I need to spend some of the money I did make going to therapy. My anal retentive analytical powers, honed over years of programming, are getting in the way. Figure out how to let go and walk away without going down a rabbit hole...
Graph Analytics at Intel
> 1. People who watch TED and TEDx are quite intelligent.

That's what they like to think, yes.

If you're talking about acolytes who watch large numbers of TED talks then yes, most of them very likely know the difference. Many have probably even attended TEDx events. But TED talks have spread to far more casual audiences-- people who share merely share the links on twitter and facebook and have probably watched less than 10 talks in their life.

> 2. There are no TEDx videos on ted.com, only on subdomain http://tedxtalks.ted.com.

When I visit that link, I see the large TED logo in the upper left corner (with no 'x' by it). While it doesn't have the flashy video cloud thing that the main page does, the theme is identical. Additionally, I do not need to visit the site to watch the talk, TEDx talks are mostly on YouTube. This talk does not even have the splash page: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDpuJXgD7Rs

Sure it says "TEDx" but how is a casual viewer supposed to know what that means? How much effort am I really going to devote to the implications of the phrase "independently organized TED event" if I'm inclined to care at all?

> 3. Every TEDx video has this disclaimer: This video was filmed at an independently organized TEDx event and uploaded by the organizer. To flag a video (good or bad!), use this form.

I'll admit, I did not notice that disclaimer without you pointing it out. I'm not sure why, the font is large enough. Maybe it's the light gray text.

> So yeah, this was a gross exaggeration.

Nobody cares.
Tarsnap has a bug-bounty program [1] which has uncovered numerous bugs, including a critical security bug [2]

It seems to me that offering a bug bounty can significantly improve the security of a system, even when the prize-money is relatively small.

[1] http://www.tarsnap.com/bugbounty.html

[2] http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2011-01-18-tarsnap-critical-...
Maybe that sounding awkward is a hint to the nature of what you are requesting.
And you think that is how you will request it when the box on computers for existing customers says "I don't want Parental Controls"?
I believe that _____ is wrong, but am reconsidering my opinion on the filter due to to this part: "Paul Goggins (Wythenshawe and Sale East) (Lab): Two weeks ago, the head of the Security Service warned about the extent of Islamist extremism. This week, two individuals have been charged with serious terrorist offences. What is the Prime Minister going to do in January when, as a result of his Government’s legislation, some of those whom the Home Secretary has judged to pose the greatest threat to our security are released from the provisions of their terrorism prevention and investigation measures?

The Prime Minister: We have put in place some of the toughest controls that one can possibly have within a democratic Government, and the TPIMs are obviously one part of that. We have had repeated meetings of the extremism task force—it met again yesterday—setting out a whole series of steps that we will take to counter the extremist narrative, including by blocking online sites. Now that I have the opportunity, let me praise Facebook for yesterday reversing the decision it took about the showing of beheading videos online. We will take all these steps and many more to keep our country safe.". But now that I think about it, is this part of the parental controls filter or something else?

Now, take a look at the assertion in "Tackling extremism in the UK"[1]: "1.4 This is a distinct ideology which should not be confused with traditional religious practice. It is an ideology which is based on a distorted interpretation of Islam, which betrays Islam’s peaceful principles, and draws on the teachings of the likes of Sayyid Qutb. Islamist extremists deem Western intervention in Muslim-majority countries as a ‘war on Islam’, creating a narrative of ‘them’ and ‘us’. They seek to impose a global Islamic state governed" I have doubts that Islam is peaceful, but also about censoring websites about even advocating terrorism, and this is at the government level, not a recommendation, but I do not see a problem with an ISP doing it. It seems the article is referring to the government blocking terrorist sites, which I think is a different thing and not the best idea, rather than ISP parental controls, which the article was about. Am I misunderstanding, are these connected more, is the government forcing the blockage of a. immoral but legal sites in the filter or just b. child _____[2], or also c. terrorist sites? Government should only block b, ISP should block b and may provide parental controls to block a and c if they want. But I don't quite understand what is going on.

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tackling-extremis...
[2] Seems what the _parental_ filter is implicated for here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25067051
Why isn't there any encryption application on GSM calling?
In Iran the Wikipedia page for Dick Cheney is blocked, as well as anyone else with that first name. Way to go Britain!
This was an interesting and quaint sentiment in 1993. Now it's an attitude shared by overbearing grandmas and hipsters alike.

The culture police need to move on. I don't like loud conversations, but it's a jet plane - not a damn library. (And at least my librarian does not infantilize me)
I just wish Telegram would have less hubris. Ever since they launched, they've downplayed any possible problem. I know they've had to wade through a bunch of bogus criticisms, but there are some legitimately worrying aspects of Telegram that they seem to be trying to sweep under the rug. This $200k contest stunt seems to be a (very effective) marketing ploy which further distracts people from the fact that Telegram hasn't demonstrated any desire to seek out professional cryptographers to examine their entire end-to-end pipeline for flaws.

It seems like the best possible thing they could do is to hire Matasano to fly out and dig through their whole architecture for flaws. That way they'd either earn tacit approval from the crypto community, or any obvious internal oversights would be exposed (in which case fixing those errors would earn them approval anyway). This contest doesn't seem to achieve those ends.

The message they've been sending is, "We're Telegram, and we're confident we don't need your help." But resisting the ability of governments to rifle through our data must be a community effort to succeed. Telegram is claiming to be a trustworthy hero. But individual heroes are single points of failure, and have historically been far too easy to coerce or circumvent.

There's also nothing stopping Telegram from being malicious (or being coerced), so I'm worried people won't notice if Telegram themselves try to snoop on everyone's messages by e.g. pushing an update which tweaks the protocol just slightly enough to be exploitable. Whereas if TextSecure tried to pull something like that, people would notice.

Of course, since Telegram refuses to give a proof for the security of their home-grown KDF, it seems like it's possible they designed it to be exploitable in some secret way, in order to access people's conversations. A security proof would prevent this possibility, but they don't seem to think it's a big deal. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6918907

In fact, they've been bizarrely evasive on that point. Why design your own KDF? Speed? Then why not use a secure tunable KDF like scrypt? Is it to show off their own genius? Then why haven't they published it for peer review to take credit for their achievement? And why turn down Moxie's offer to join forces and incorporate an existing 10 million userbase? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6915741 ... None of that makes sense, and the only reasonable explanation I can think of is that maybe they're trying something sneaky.
I can also get a good idea whether the CPU is idle or doing some particular task just by listening to the motherboard. This isn't any sort of paranormal effect, it's quite audible. I suspect most of it comes from the inductors on the CPU vcore DC-DC converter.

For me, the sounds I hear are somewhat like this:
Animated GIF = chuff-chuff-chuff, one chuff per frame transition
Scrolling terminal window = low hissing, like someone slowly breathing out
Dragging window around the screen = high-pitched whine
CPU stress test = very high-pitched whistling
Loading a big app = a more noisy hiss than scrolling the terminal window, interspersed with HDD sounds

I was tested at a young age to have above-average hearing range, so maybe that also has a factor in how well you can hear these things; I don't listen to loud music or subject myself to loud noises either.
They're really only doing that for hipster cred. That way they can easily write articles titled "How I made (really simple/trivial application) with (really fledgling technology)" such as "how I made a twitter client with node.js" or "how I put 2 sprites on the screen with webgl" or "how I managed 2tps with java".

We know all financial companies use databases running on tandem or tuxedo. But that's not cool sounding. How are they supposed to get fun jobs doing nothing with catered lunches? HOW, HOW I ASK!
They've had to do this in the EU for a while now (information here http://www.apple.com/uk/legal/statutory-warranty/ ) I'm surprised they're trying to pull a fast one in Australia.
It's in the boot/ directory here if you go back far enough in time: https://github.com/mozilla/rust

Sadly the GitHub Web UI seems to cap viewable history at 100 pages' worth of commits.
This is beautiful, great job.
I thought Europe was less conservative than the US.
Thanks i had no idea.

Long story short: while totally denying its existance the pact of USA, UK and many other countires spent billions of dollars to built sattelite-communication interceptinig facilities... while 99% of world's traffic moved into fiber optic undersea cables by 2006.
The way I have found to really get the most out of my minutes is to trick my brain into processing a new thing.

This really is fundamentally a new way of thinking, but if you do something different every day, you are tripping up the "caching" functions your brain optimizes your day with, giving you a tiring but rewarding memory of 24 hours rather than what seems like an echo of a previous experience.
You can't because your coins aren't "available." I've only used coinbase once and haven't done more than buy btc, but it did take several days for the coins to become available (presumably for bank transfer to clear), during which time the price dropped by about $100/btc. I'm not mad about this- it was clear at time of purchase that I'd have to wait for transaction to clear, but >3 days would have upset me.
There are many ways of seeing a thing.

Contrarians are seldom wrong because in essence, lots of shit kind of sucks.

It is easy to find the ways in which a thing sucks, specifically after a good deal of exposure.

That's seldom all there is to it though.

Often there are very good and enjoyable aspects to things that also happen to suck in other ways.

So I figure you did enjoy those talks and your also seeing a side to them that could be considered as sucking in some aspects.
Hopefully with a corresponding product quality increase to 2 years planned obsolescence instead of only 1.
I agree that paper money has value, I'm just not sure that it is intrinsic. I'm also not sure a currency necessarily should have intrinsic value.
Alright, looks like I may be downvoted to oblivion. I still believe I'm on to something.

Would any downvoters care to take a minute to share what you think I'm missing? Seems like the polite thing to do. I know you're busy, so make it short and sweet if you have to, but if I'm wrong/naive/ignorant, please, help me out.
How is this any different than the advent of "total war"? The threshold at which an intelligence apparatus aught to begin contingencies for defection should be somewhere around Dunbar's number, not the grand opening of bumblehive (which I've just realized has a splendid double meaning now).
We get about 15 qualified leads a month (on average, each project is worth about $25k). We're focused on the US and Canada only for the moment.
Definitely not. One can tell a naive, non-Unix programmer by the fact that they write code that pollutes the output of a command line utility with informational/ error garbage. (And it almost goes without saying that much real work still happens on the command line.)

Regarding the OP comment about not being able to tell correspondence between a given output and an error: That is an interesting point, but generally in the Unix command line idiom, one stops the program on the first error, so it is easy to tell. However, if you have process that can't stop (like a server), then one has to be more careful and should probably use a more general logging system.
It's possible to do something like that in C. In C++, you can even do some template magic to create all the appropriate functions for each opcode based on something like the original instruction decode ROM. Brilliant and short code, but very difficult to write in the first place. Here's a very apropos example of this technique as applied to the 6502.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y71lli8MS8s
Bill Gates takes part in Reddit's Secret Santa
Is this an opt in or an opt out filter? Does any one, even for a moment, think that this is going to stop any kid from looking at porn? The techsavy kids are going to brake the system by using free or paid VPNs or TOR, and then tell their friends. Hell, if I was a kid in UK right now, I would make money selling preconfigured FireFox instances with VPN credentials to my peers. Hmm... maybe really it David Cameron's roundabout way of getting teenagers interested in hacking and computers?!?
This is the best argument to go D.

The D compiler is waaaaay better, written by a compiler expert.
It's also a little sad to see a bunch of people going to events they're not passionate about because they hear "networking is important". Unfortunately that happens a lot: people mistake effect ("I got involved in things that interested me, and met a lot of interesting people doing that") with cause ("I should go out and meet lots of people because then I'll be successful.")
Nathan Myrvold finds dinosaurs grew at slower rates
The problem in your case (no pun intended) seems to be the difficulty of "finding the right branch". With a CPU emulator, it's not so hard: look up the opcode and there it is. Would you rather scan through a single file or several dozen?
Nonconformity and Freethinking Now Considered Mental Illnesses
http://chem.tufts.edu/answersinscience/relativityofwrong.htm

Science is the art of improving successive approximations. If you think that a result is useless unless it is absolutely perfect, you are simply wrong.
"a few hours" lol. Also, where? Summon whom to court? If I were coinbase I'd simply ignore such a suit.
Or better marketing - basically everyone with an interest in cryptography distrusts these contests by default. I'd expect anyone with a cryptography product to at least understand the culture.
First, the Boeing offer wasn't even top 5 anymore. The only companies still on the bid were Dassault and Saab (favored by the military). Then, out of the blue, they come and announce... "we finally settled on Saab instead of Boeing because of NSA"... Give me a break.

Dilma is crazy to boost the government's image, internal and worldwide, making our country look like a bastion of freedom and democracy, when we both know it's none of that (unless you work for the government).

I agree with everything said about NSA, but we can't be naive to the fact this is going to be used as a PWMD (Political Weapon of Mass Destruction) to justify anything from now on.
Why don't they just build a damned slider right into the laptop?
Rdio's lead designer got his start designing a Mandy Moore *Winamp* skin.
Speculation is not investment. The difference is that investments pay dividends, and buy and hold is a viable strategy. A speculator is relying on appreciation to make flipping the asset pay off, and is screwed if they eventually need a greater fool and can't find one.
I sympathize with you, but Boeing never had a chance if one goes purely by cost: benefit comparisons.

The only way they could have won this is if they lobbied enough for the Brazilians to look past the significant shortcomings of the Boeing aircraft. And I think even then their lack of cooperation when it comes to transfer of technology and offsets would have sabotaged the deal.

Brazil already has a very reliable civilian aircraft maker in Embraer, and they are looking to bootstrap them into defense through transfer of technology. Boeing never would have done that.
In the last three years, for the day job, I've written code in C, C++, Objective C, Java, NodeJS, and C#. A recent project that was back to C was really a breath of fresh air. Simple syntax, sure you have to pay attention to memory, but you have full control and need to pay attention, at the same time very little is hidden from you. Personal projects, I prefer Python but dabble in other things as needed.

I evaluate the task and the language options. If I needed to prototype out a web service where the server was up to my control, I'd likely shy away from C/C++. In cases where I was writing a module, it would depend on the architecture/framework. Anything low-level or system related, C is my goto well above C++.

Stakeholders, external components, and team factor in.

I do love how simple and straight forward C is. Calling it hard to debug or write code correctly for is wholly based on the person making such statements.
This is really chickenshit, which is completely in line with everything else these guys have said or done.

Just so we're clear, this rules out:

* Chosen plaintext attacks
* Chosen ciphertext attacks
* Adaptive chosen ciphertext attacks
* EDIT: Also any kind of side channel

If you're keeping score at home, that's just about everything.

The only thing that would fail to meet this definition of security is repeating key XOR. And RC4.
Fascinating and fun. I really hope perf doesn't regress much from this: the zippy edit-compile-run loop is part of why Go's fun to use.
Only automotive, which was a separate company under GM stewardship. Same as how Volvo Cars (under Ford) went bust, but Volvo Trucks is still going well.
Your challenge isn't at all hard. An attacker could get into your server using some other method besides breaking SSH then simply look at your bash history.
Two dying competitors merging together to get the hold of a wonderful market that both of these and their likes, scammed and destroyed ... lets see how long you can survive together and lets see how many more will be phished with this corporate scam.
Be that as it may, I conjecture that most of the annoyance is from people's instincts that they need to talk so loudly, especially when they have trouble hearing what coming out of the phone. In fact, shouting doesn't help at all and anything much more than a whisper doesn't really help.
Those statements are entirely subjective and, frankly, come off as filled with more than a little hubris, not to mention an air of pettiness and childish language-flamewar-bait.

Correct large-scale programs are very difficult to build and debug, full-stop. It isn't a "feature" unique to C, or any other language.

Likewise for correct code, and incorrect code: they're both actually trivial to do in any language in the small scale, and see above for the large scale.

That said, I view the effort to make a Go compiler using Go is something akin to "eating your own dogfood."
The difference between bitcoin and online banking is that your bank will protect you if you are a victim of fraud.
> Professionally, I have run into programs that have massive switch statements with hundreds of cases in them, which I've always considered a "code smell".

Most optimizing compilers will emit a jump table for a switch, which is a good way to get a reasonably high performance interpreter while keeping the code pretty clean. The performance is better than using virtual methods [1].

[1]: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/threading/
I have a good knowledge of C off last years and recently started programming in Go. I find the later to be much more fun doing.
The best we can hope for is to push for modifiers to be added: "malicious hackers", "criminal hackers", etc.
Many languages can already be programmatically refactored. Pretty much any .NET language, for example, and Java, of course.
They are blocked because they didn't file for (or were denied) an exemption. Everyone was told for some time now about this. If they were denied, it is because a three year old could access adult material there (no verification of any type). Where are these facts in the article?

It is likely they didn't comply to generate a reaction like many of the comments in this thread.
On the contrary, these changes will allow us to more easily parallelise parts of the compiler which should yield compilation time improvements.
"If you really think of it, when a stock doesn't pay dividends, there really isn't a whole lot of difference between a share of stock and a baseball card." - http://blogmaverick.com/2008/09/08/talking-stocks-and-money/
Cool article. I'll take his prompt.

So I kinda-sorta launched in 2013. Not the big project I hoped to launch, but an unrelated side project that distracted me from the big project. Should still have serious profit potential, but I made certain assumptions about the support infrastructure that panned out to be incorrect despite early evidence contrariwise. I'm now working to recover from that, and developing more robust stratagems that technically I probably should've handled earlier. It's a bummer because it's going to make things take longer to get off the ground than I would've liked, but we are launched and accepting payments. It's just that no one has chosen to disburse that payment yet. ;)
I have also used goto a few times in Go. There are occasions where it makes the code more obvious than the alternatives.

A lot of people cargo-cult Dijkstra's hate on goto. It does have its uses as long as you're very selective about when to apply it.
Your analysis is correct. Their terms and conditions rule out just about every form of attack.