skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is actually more of an issue with things like e.g. Namecoin; depending on your parsing library, just processing namecoin values can do bad things to your computer. There are some namecoin values out there on the lines of 'namecoind send XXX to YYY'.

It seems to me more like the author misunderstood some of the point of the talk; I would rate the botnet command and control angle more worrisome from an Interpol point of view than a local exploit from shoddily written fake Bitcoin software.
No one expected he would endorse.
If words mean what people agree that they mean (and I don't really know how else it could be!) then if enough people say "guys" isn't necessarily male then it's like an election. You might not like who won, but it got enough votes to be a legitimate thing.
To me it would just seem more intuitive to have time go from down-->up. These signs seem to do the exact opposite.
This one is just an update of that one.

The original designer, Nikki Sylianteng, is cited in the Wired article.
> Have you tried explaining microagressions to someone who has never exprienced any before? It is not easy.

It's hard because the term itself seems designed to make it hard, in my opinion.

A microaggression is unintended, while aggression is very much intended. "Micro" + "aggression" should mean "a small aggression", but it means actually something very different. It's confusing.

I think avoiding overly academic terms like "microaggressions" would help here. Instead of explaining terms, just talk plain and to the point:

> "When you say 'Usually girls don't like [some geeky thing]', it can make the woman hearing it uncomfortable. It's factually true that few women are interested, but it's not cool to point it out, better to avoid saying it and not look like a jerk."

No need for new theoretical terms with confusing meanings.
You can listen to the concerns of the group (all women) and still trivialize the objections of a minority (psuedo-intellectual women) without being sexist.

The position he has to argue whether the objections have merit is that he's a thinking, rational human who can objectively consider whether something is sexist or not.
Super-interesting article, thank you for sharing.

Two great quotes from near the bottom...

"At this point in the project we have Super Mario Brothers 1 running mostly on native code, although not very highly optimized. We've learned that static compilation, while possible, is rendered pointless by some of the inherent challenges that emulating a system presents."

and...

"These issues must be resolved if we want a playable game. Sadly, the solution marks the final nail in the coffin of the integrity of this project."

So brave. 10/10 - would read again.
Thank you for mentioning this. I would have likely never heard about the tour in time otherwise; an upvote isn't enough good karma for you, sir/madame!
People do it because it's shorter and more colorful. Count the syllables in your suggestions.
Good writeup. Women in tech are faced with a constant barrage of microaggressions.

I see many men taking a stance of "I'm not sexist, this is not my problem", but really this is every man's responsibility. And it needs to stop. What are YOU doing about it?
Given that the past years have "proven" that it's "perfectly safe" to set off hydrogen bombs in the desert; I think it'd be reasonable to assume that it's quite possible to launch a container of junk into space. Not sur why one would care if it hits the sun or not...

Iff one can make a container that can survive the blast/lift-off -- one wouldn't need to worry about the launch vehicle exploding in-atmosphere: there'd be no rocket fuel. Added bonus: find a way to use existing war heads, and combine with nuclear disarmament...
> 6. Assuming women they meet are in non-technical roles.

I like to think I am not a sexist person (intentionally or not), but this is one I have to make an actual silent effort to get right. It's just that the statistics are unfortunately very skewed. Some 80%+ of software engineering roles at big companies go to men, but for non-technical roles it can be 50% women or more. So if you meet a woman it is more likely that she is not an engineer. But statistics don't make assumptions acceptable. I try to make sure I don't assume anything about people I meet around work (don't assume a man is an engineer, don't assume a woman is not).

Makes me cringe when I hear this conversation:
Man: "So what do you do here?"
Woman: "I'm a SWE on _______"
Man: "Oh really?"
My graduate adviser use to say, if you ask "how do you add 1+1?" a student with a bachelor's degree answers "2". A person with a master's degree will write a 10 line C program to calculate it, then tell you "2". A person with a PhD just says "I don't know, but I can tell you where to find the answer."
The article itself notes that not all of these things are problems to/for all women/people. At some point you have to take that at face value. The writer finds these to be problems. Take it as a point of information.

Similarly, your 50+ year old coworker's use of "girls" is a point of information. I find it very weird and creepy when an older female co-worker calls me a "girl" in front of my boss, or says something like "We girls just need to do things a little differently, you know!" Weird and creepy, and no less sexist because it's from a lady.

(Apparently women her age, on the other hand, find "lady" somewhat... inappropriate....?)

Re: dark UI patterns and more, making things better for women makes things better for all users. Glad you seem to have noticed that. If you don't see why it should disproportionately drive off women, you should read/listen up a bit. For instance, direct messages on Twitter are different experiences for women and men: http://blog.ameliagreenhall.com/post/the-hand-on-the-knee-a-...
Also interestingly, this accumulation of energy in front of the vehicle is the cause of Sonic booms. Acoustic waves, and pressure dispersion in general, get accumulated in front of the craft, momentarily creating enormous resistance and temperatures as it passes the speed of sound. Of course the accumulation of light is different in that it can't affect the vehicles themselves due to the principle of relativity (constant speed of light for all inertial observers).
I think is is pretty interesting that the human element is what caused this guy to get caught. bragging about having a rootkit and buying the ticket himself seems like something he should have known better than to do.
Perhaps, then, the article should have said anything resembling that. Then we could address how absurd that complaint is.

I've never seen anything close to what you're describing. Believe it or not, 99.9% of adults have no problem saying the words "sexy" or "hot" without having whatever weird childish reaction you're describing.
> This is a good time to bring up the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect

Thanks. Now I know the name for this.
We had three types of PMs:

- Middle management mover-and-shaker. Most recent technical contribution to a product: Some time in the last ice-age. Super power: secret meetings that lasted for hours, discussing how much all the devs were late, and who to blame.

- Underflunky. Ran daily stand-ups to gather status.
Last technical contribution to a product: Never. Perpetually terrified. Super-power: "Since we need this done by the end of today, let's have a bunch of meetings about it. Are you available for an hour at 10, 2 and 5?"

- Fantastically technical PM. Last technical contribution to a product: Helped debug a gnarly problem over in the other building about ten minutes ago. Super-power: Writing intelligent specs that devs understood and that actually described shit that would work. Achilles heel: Incredibly over-worked and a burnout in five months.

We had one or two of the latter PMs on the last project I was on. They were great; every other PM did negative work.

I did get our underflunky PM to start calling our scrum meetings "Status".
Although, while I understand the authors concerns on point #1 I think it comes from a misunderstanding of the reason on why so many people use the phrase "you guys". I'm going to go out on a limb here and defend all of us who with use this phrase regularly.

"You guys" is the most common form of "you" plural used in the mid-west and western United States. For those who were not taught English in a region where "you guys" is standard, I can assure you that we consider "you guys" to be completely gender neutral. I can see how this phrase would seem strange to someone from a region of the United States that uses "you" or "you all" or "ya'll" or "folks", but for us it is simply a phrase that is used by both women and men when addressing a group of people of any gender (all women, all men, mixed).

See you guys tomorrow != See you men tomorrow.
Are you guys done yet? != Are you boys done yet?

Now, is the etymology of the word sexist, a la "mankind"? That I do not know (it probably is), but the intent of those of us who use it is simply that it is two words meaning "you all". We do not think about injecting gender at all into the conversation, in fact we use this phrase to avoid it (as silly as that may seem)! I would imagine that this phrase is more likely to turn heads when it is used in a region of The United States where it is not the normal linguistic way of saying "you" plural.
> Sexism, like racism, is a societal problem, engrained in all of us.

Are you trying to somehow imply everyone is racist? Are you further implying that everyone is sexist?

> ... a right to complain and be heard

I'm curious, who (in the US anyways) doesn't have that right. At this point I feel like I can get sued for calling a stop sign red. It's getting a little absurd.
An analogy might be made in terms of escape velocity. For the longest time, we hurled stones at targets in trees and towers. However, in the times leading up to WWII, we (Germans, mostly) began to sense that we could launch objects at the Moon or Mars with plausibly incremental improvements. A tipping or inflection point is reached where things go all zoomy and nonlinear.

70 years later, we might be entering that era for intelligence. These sorts of things are not easily rejected by looking at historical trajectories.
Natl. hiring expts. reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track [pdf]
I hope it stays. It was very well written and balanced, and did what it set out to do, which is get me to look at a couple things I've done or defended (for instance saying "guys" or calling women "girls" in a social context) and seen them in a different light.

Also it is discouraging people from calling software "sexy", and I support that -- because it is just annoying and sounds like something lame marketing people would say.
EFF-related announcements often have that "Fortune 500 press release" feel to them.

I wonder if that's a natural result of EFF being a lawyer-heavy organization.
Shortest privacy policy you can think of
i think nuclear power was realised as a result of the revolution in physics at the turn of the century... nothing to do with looking for alternatives.
Convert MOV to DVD
The first problem can be addressed by the CurveCP prototype, which uses NaCl.

tinysshd (see tinyssh.org) coupled with curvecpserver is a working example.
Don't worry about anything besides;

1. What problem you are solving

2. How well are you solving that problem

3. How many people have the same problem

4. If 2 is "Excellent" and 3 is either a lot of people, or a few very rich, build that business.

My last suggestion, is select problems that you want to fix for yourself. Rather than a list of business ideas, I keep a list of problems I want to solve.
> 4. Using a default male avatar
How do you decide if an avatar is male? Jeans and T-shirts do not a male make in this day and age. I am not quite certain how you would distinguish between a non-gendered and gendered avatar.

If you can't tell the difference, then there is no problem. Obviously that is not the concern here. The human brain has evolved for millions of years the ability to distinguish gender and understand iconography. Maybe you should actually think about the problem before dismissing it with a straw-man.

> 5. Describing software or algorithms as “sexy”, “hot”, etc.
According to the author, this creates a "college frat-boy environment". I would argue that outlawing normal adult words like "sexy" and "hot" creates more of an infantilized classroom environment where you are essentially saying "Hey, don't say that bad word in front of the girls, or you'll get punished." Using "sexy" to refer to a well-designed, sleek new website is, in my opinion, perfectly reasonable.

It's called professionalism. Do you know what that word means?

> 10. Using dark UI patterns.
This is a problem for all users. I don't see why this should disproportionately drive women off. If it is, the solution lies in more privacy education and outreach, not bashing people who write the software.

This is addressed in the article. If you force people to use their real names and women are already disproportionately the target of privacy violations, then it does more damage to women than to men to have such a UI. If someone is being heckled or stalked and they can't shut that down efficiently, then they will stop using your service.
Gary Taubes is a journalist that does a great job of summarizing scientific research. Read or watch just about anything he writes.
> The people being sexualized.

That would be fair if the sexualization was direct e.g. Bert calling his female co-worker Linda "smoking hot". But if Bert says an algorithm is sexy, I don't know how exactly it sexualizes Linda. Society's sexualization can no longer be an excuse, because both men are women are now heavily sexualized in society.

> I rarely see or hear blanket Puritanical statements like you describe.

The posted article is chock-full of such statements. I usually don't hear such statements from people I work with either.
Advantages of new signs
- consolidates parking restrictions in one easy to read graphic

Advantages of old signs
- can easily swap out restrictions by adding or removing signs

IMO it's not very difficult once you get used to it. Remember that the default is "parking is always OK" and add restrictions as you read top to bottom. Of course, each municipality may have its own "default" rules. The City of Los Angeles can tow you after 72 hours on the same street, and Pasadena has no parking 2-6am every day.
Check Out the Fallout Where Im 4rm
> its worth taking a moment to think more carefully about why that emotional response was triggered.

Because most of the complaints enumerated in the article are tenuous and absurd?

> you're silencing and dismissing viewpoints that deserve to be heard.

There are many viewpoints that have more argumentative merit, and I have a finite amount of time to read blog posts.
"It all sounds very interesting"

Thanks. I'll take this positive beginning at face value :-)

"Nowhere do I see basic technical info like "It's a new IP transport protocol used in place of TCP", or "It's compatible with existing networks because...", or "It's (better than|different to) (HTTP/2.0|QUIC|SPDY) because..."

I'm sorry if the material on the site is not technical enough for your taste. We've just launched and consider the site and the blog a work in progress. (Follow us on twitter at @packetzoom and me personally at @IAmChetanAhuja for updates).

Having said that, our customers are not necessarily people following the network protocol worlds closely. The stuff that you find "bland" and "pretty" is actually very helpful for a large portion of our target audience.

Now of course, those who click on the "Learn" link and don't find enough in-depth info are welcome to, and do, contact us directly. Every single mail we get on info@ or support@ addresses is read by a human in our (rather small) team and yes, we respond. Just as I'm responding to more detailed technical questions here.

"You're selling a protocol layer, so you're not going to have any non-nerdy customers!"

No we're not selling "a protocol layer". We're selling a drop-dead simple way to speed up downloads. Some of our customers are more interested in details of the protocol than others. But the majority of them want their apps to be fast and couldn't care less about, or even want to know about QUIC/SPDY/HTTP2.0 or whatever. Their questions are more like -- How easy is it to integrate? (very). Do I have to rewrite my code? (No). What do I have to change on the server side? (nothing).

And those of our customers who do want to go in-depth into details of the technology, do. They just talk to us and we explain what we're doing to the extent it doesn't reveal trade secrets.

"a lot of layer-leakage going on - not that it's necessarily bad, but the reasons for it need to be clearer"

This seems to be the crux of your issues with what we're doing. The reasons are ultra clear to us. Apps are faster and users are happier. That the only thing that matters.

We've found that merging layers allows us to handle, say, out of order delivery or dropped packets more smartly and more naturally. For far too long, user experience has been held hostage to diktats from the ivory tower. It's about time we start thinking from the ground up to create technology suited to what the users needs and not because we want to maintain some platonic ideal of "layer separation".
Except, in both of the examples you cite, .Net has had those features since day 1 ( more than 13 years now ).

I think it's pretty disingenuous to say those things are hard to measure or even estimate. Java and C# are close enough that you actually CAN measure them in a pretty useful way.

Java has been behind the curve for YEARS as compared to .Net with perhaps the exception of the cross platform aspects and the more permissive licensing.
Maybe if you were a decent human being, you wouldn't have to.
Gary Taubes provides a good summary of recent scientific studies. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qEuIlQONcHw
A 'timeoutable' promise could be represented as (pseudocode):

Promise.any([newTimeout(1000), otherPromise])

where:

newTimeout :: Milliseconds -> Promise

If the combination of these two isn't already in Promise implementations, it should be.

Bluebird already has the timeout function with similar semantics.

https://github.com/petkaantonov/bluebird/blob/master/API.md#...
I will accept many corrections for the benefit of diversity, but when even the majority of the disadvantaged group uses the word in a non-hostile way, I stop feeling like I'm being asked to be helpful and start feeling like I'm being micromanaged and controlled by people who refuse to take into account the obvious intent of my words that the majority of listeners understand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You#Informal_plural_forms

Informal plural forms
Despite you being both singular and plural, some dialects
retain the distinction between a singular and plural you
with different words. Examples of such pronouns sometimes
seen and heard are:

...
you guys – U.S.,[2] particularly in the Midwest,
Northeast, South Florida and West Coast;
Canada, Australia. Used regardless of the
genders of those referred to
...

(I live, work, and went to school in Northeastern U.S.)
I like the design of the new signs, but is it easy to read? I'm not a driver and I have pretty bad vision, but it seems like it would be hard to understand from the driver's seat.
You're absolutely right. It's casual and doesn't carry an explicit gender connotation to most people that use it.

At the same time, bringing attention to the implicit sexism (a la 'mankind') is valid. It doesn't mean anybody has to shame themselves for saying 'guys', it just suggests that they might want to consider other word choices in delicate situations or when they've got the reserves to be a little more conscientious.
You are using the historical trajectory of rockets in a way to prove your point :)

But looking precisely at rockets, there was a boom in technology where the distances and velocities we could go increased exponentially until the tech matured, and now it's settled and still pretty expensive to go up there.

In fact, this trend seems common with technologies (rapid growth until a wall is reached). I wish I had a link to the graphs I have in mind that make this argument.
LLILC is absolutely interested in upstreaming and in fact, at least one big change (prelim COFF support for MCJIT) is already upstreamed (http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-...) in addition to a few smaller ones.

Diffing upstream with http://github.com/Microsoft/llvm will let you track what Microsoft is currently doing in its repo.
Agree with: "Unless you are a women in tech then you can't speak for any women in tech and even if you are, you can only speak for one women in tech, yourself." "What I do know is that every single successful person puts up with crap."

Disagree with implied ideas that: because we can all only speak for ourselves, we shouldn't speak. Because everyone gets crap, we don't need to fight against shit. That guys feeling bad for microaggressions are stereotyping women's needs (?).

We're all jerks sometimes, and often we don't even know it. When we realize we did something that made someone else feel bad, it's natural to feel defensive and at the same time sorry. It's not stereotyping to listen honestly to someone's viewpoint and consider it. And not having time to eat Cheetos is not what women are facing, it's weird stuff like the boss never inviting them to beer or getting sexually explicit trolling. You've read the news; you know what's in the harassment lawsuits: retaliation for sexual relationships had or not had, promotions denied because of "fit", networking events that were male-only, and all the guys in the company going along. If a guy had practice saying, "Hey, let's not call that app sexy and then ask if grandma can use it," he might actually have the practice and the courage to stand up to some of this serious stuff.
How can you engender trust when you interpret all behaviour as aggressive?
It would seem that simply using oak chips in plastic (or glass - inert in the context of destilled rum etc) barrels would be an easier way to speed up the process. Apparently the whisky industry is moving away from the age/years distinction - as it really is more marketing than a good indication of taste (see No-Age Statement).

Cognac is moving in a different direction: increasing the age required of the youngest au-de-vies for VSOP and XO characterisation. As rum is generally blended, like Cognac - that's probably a better analogy than single malt whisky. This why for example bottles of the same series of Cognac, or brand rums like Havana Club 7 anos can taste (almost) the same even when produced from different raw stocks - they are blended to meet a certain taste.
The expression "this is why we can't have nice things" comes to mind when I think about public toilets in Chicago. There's always some idiot that wipes shit all over the stall or vomits on the floor or blows up the toilet with an M80.
The biggest problem with Whipple shields with relativistic projectiles is that the projectiles literally don't have time to react. Partly because of the speed itself, partly because of time dilation.

You need to throw enough at it that a large chunk of the nuclei in the impactor are hit by nuclei of the atoms you are throwing at it - not an insignificant feat. Small moon may work.

Anything less and yes, it's rapidly expanding into a cloud of gas, but nowhere near fast enough. It'll hit the target well before it dissipates significantly if you're not careful.
For her #2 point, (using "girls"), I think "girls" is not actually the closest thing to "guys."

I think you say "boys & girls" or "guys & gals," traditionally. Gals has fallen out of common use, but it's probably the most appropriate word if women are taking offense to "girls."
Russian way with the mathematical travelling salesman (1979)
That's what you think, because they're not looking at you!

Guy: "No one stares at my chest at conferences -- I'm sure it doesn't happen! How childish!"

Gal: ...