skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The article you cited describes games that feature 2d projection of artificial 3d movement that doesn't correspond with the signals coming in to our vestibular system. The same is even more true for VR experiences -- artificial movement that doesn't match what we feel causes nausea for many. The reason Valve can claim 0% sickness is that they're only talking about experiences that don't generate mixed signals, where the player's position in the real world matches 1:1 with the virtual perspective, so that sense mismatch sensation never has reason to trigger.
> This looks a lot like the holy inquisition

It looks like a loyalty oath, to be sure, but, while one might argue those are undesirable, comparisons with the Holy Inquisition (whether by that one intends the Spanish Inquisition or the Roman Inquisition)...well, to borrow from Pulp Fiction, it ain't the same f-in ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same damn sport.

> either "think this way" or get fired.

I think you are confusing "thinking this way" with "commit to act this way". Two different things.

> I thought it took all sorts to make a world.

Presuming that's perceived as important to the mission of a firm, why would it be unacceptable for a firm to expect employees to commit to act based on that as a condition of employment?
L.A. Dodgers Accelerator
Since any code that sites install will just get circumvented by these adblockers (as they already do if you check the filters) what we're headed towards are hard paywalls where you have to login to access any content.
Thats a slippery slope. History is full of uncomfortable facts. Should we stop teaching it?
Fair point. But proper key strengthening is a well-known solution to this well-known problem. The general methodology of using password-safe hash + master password + domain name is useful.

As you note, SHA isn't appropriate for this purpose. PBKDF2-strenghtened SHA, SCrypt, BCrypt and other functions should be used.
lynching! good joke
That fact really made me laugh when I looked into it. Thank you for the cycloped fact.
"And the tech IPO is basically dead. The tech IPO market is at early 1980's volumes. For most of the 90's the majority of tech funding was public. This has reversed. It used to be routine to hit $20 million in revenues and go public. Not anymore."

It's interesting how it seems that inequality is an unintended consequence of Sarbanes-Oxley. Before an engineer might vest after four or five years, just as the company is going public at a modest valuation. But if the company stays private, the employees are forced to go double or nothing. Either the company continues to grow, and there is a Google or Facebook like outcome with hundreds of employees getting rich. Or the company goes sideways and the stock ends up diluted to nothing. Furthermore the general public would have shared in the growth in the 1980's, but now most of the value has accrued by the time the company goes public. So for the few that make it, all the wins go to the founders and VC's, rather than having the general public get in early.
Kathy gave a talk at Business of Software a couple years back on the same topic. Well worth an hour of your time: https://vimeo.com/54469442
My bank (Swedbank/Sparbanken Nord) forces you to do it like that. They won't approve online payments on your regular card, instead you have to go to their website and create a temporary card number with a limited balance and an expiration date counted in months rather than years.
The LastPass database is encrypted client side too. Only the encrypted blob is synced to the cloud. Are people under the impression the passwords are stored up in the cloud in a for accessible to LastPass or otherwise unencrypted?

https://lastpass.com/whylastpass_technology.php
> reliable sources for the bare facts

A laudable goal, but one I'm not sure can be achieved. It's often difficult or impossible to obtain accurate reporting of today's events, and, at least in my experience, the passage of time does nothing to simplify the task.
I've actually got a very basic solution to that.

Use lowercase hexadecimal as the "baseline" password. From there, truncate to the length requirement, and add symbols to the end to guarantee complexity requirement.

For example, "masterpass gmail.com" will md5sum to "194b52e5". If a password requires symbols, add a "!" to the end. If it requires a capitol letter, add "A" to the end. Add in the order of "number->letter->symbol". So... a site that requires numbers, capitol letters, and symbols would be:

"194b52e51A!". (The hashed password, followed by '1A!')
I completely agree. Logic or philosophy can help one to practice complex abstraction. Even the study of law (as in legal code) or religion involves abstract thinking.
Because the Italian are even better than we French are at marketing products? :)
The problem is that a lot of farms and ranches get their water from wells on the farms/ranches themselves. For those that have to pump in their water from elsewhere, then yeah, let's get water prices restructured. For those pumping their own water from their own property, however, we'd need some major rejiggering of property rights in order to justify charging land owners for the use of what's arguably their own property, and I'm not sure if that rejiggering would be a net good. I suppose a property depth could be enforced much in the same way that a property height is already enforced (in order to prevent landowners from restricting air traffic, for example), but that's going to have some huge backlash, I'd reckon, seeing as how much of an investment is required to build wells / water tanks, run power lines, etc. Perhaps mandatory metering of electric wells combined with water usage limits ("this is how much water we've detected to exist underneath your property; we'll charge if you use more than that, and credit if you use less than that") would be a good solution/compromise?
This is how I scaled StatsD at SoundCloud (without having to change client code) before we switched to Prometheus:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12871642/scaling-statsd-w...

(the first answer)
I agree, I wish browsers performed some key strengthening built in.
Since ES5, you can't use `with` in strict mode.

Well, you shouldn't use it anyways since it's confusing/ambiguous and it's also terrible for performance.
Are you judging a person based on his nationality?
There is nothing to be said for it. People in aggregate do not respond to wishes -- they respond to incentives. Wishing that people would behave in a particular way without examining why they aren't is an absurdity, particularly when that wish explicitly preserves the status quo at the expense of people who have only speech.
Nintendo Finally Releases NES RPG 'Mother' (Earthbound Zero) in USA
Oh good. I see you have a list already.
>Except that you'd still only need that same 1kg thruster on a 500kg satellite that you'd need on a 10kg satellite.

It might be bad for truly tiny sats, but we're talking about 150kg vs. 700kg. 1kg is perfectly fine for those.
I think it would still be non-trivial as event bindings, DOM bindings and others things would not work out of the box. It's a super neat idea though.
and not having to know ed is an excellent reason to learn vi :)

obCompulsoryEdJoke: https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/ed-msg.html
I'm not really sure this is one for HN to be up in arms about.

FTA: "If we receive a legal claim about your RSS content, we will tell you so that you can resolve the issue, including indemnifying Apple if Apple is included in the claim."

I guess I don't understand why you do not take issue with this line. Apple has "enrolled" him in an indemnification clause without his consent or request.
It's not bold at all. It is to be expected from near perfect tracking and imperceptible latency.

Current video games make people sick for the exact same reason the Occulus makes people sick: they have you move with your thumbs, instead of walking around just like in real life. If a sufficiently good VR game don't give you a "move" button, but have you move for real instead, you can't get sick.

On the other hand, I expect sickness in simulator games even with a perceptually perfect VR system. Because, well… I used to fly (on a glider), and got airsick. I'd expect similar problems from a VR glider simulator, because… sickness is actually realistic in this case.
Trust is not what makes a claim true or valuable, and dismissing progressive, pragmatic, and falsifiable claims purely based on trust is naive prejudice. Even scientists check their own work because perception is a crapshoot.
Depends how simple. Obviously "add the domain name to the end of the password" is too simple. But there are other ideas that are equally easy to remember or regenerate.
Google's New Bike Plan Wants Silicon Valley to Be More Like Copenhagen
> Mr. kbenson, you and many of your kind are trying to foist on the idea that people filtering the information companies give to them are doing something immoral.

That's a simplification of my argument as to be meaningless. The information was not given, it was traded. The consumer's portion of the trade is paid in viewing the advertising.

> I do not think even you believe that, but perhaps there is a profit-seeking based incentive to seed a feeling of guilt in the people who avoid ads, or perhaps to make yourself feel good by verbalizing your frustration with decreasing profits from online ads.

Do I believe in your rephrasing of my argument that drops the salient points? No. Am I in an industry that does advertising in any way? Also no.

> Whichever the motivation for such church-like patronizing and false analogies, private profit from ads is not and will not be more important than fundamental freedoms of people to read only that which they want.

Meaning you have a right to content which is owned by someone else without compensating them? I don't believe that is a fundamental right or freedom. If you mean something else by this, which I hope and assume you do, then please elaborate.

> My recommendation to you is to stop crying and seeking the ones guilty for the decreasing profits from online ads and think of some different business model that instead of bothering people with ads, does something good for them.

I'm not in advertising in any way, I don't care if advertising as a form of revenue survives. I don't like advertising most of the time. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything I've said. I haven't made a case that advertising is good, or advertising is moral, or that you should choose content with advertising and them watch the advertising. I'm simply saying that if you agree to content in return for viewing ads, and then you deliberately prevent your viewing of those ads, then I view that as a slightly immoral thing to do.

Maybe it's my terminology that offends you, by using immoral. I could use different terminology, if any lended itself to this that I knew of. I'm using it as a way to describe behavior where one party reneges on a contract with another. I could has used unethical instead, but really that's because I think it's both. I think it's immoral, and additionally societally I think it's unethical.

But it's unethical and immoral on a very, very small scale. That doesn't mean many of those actions from many individuals don't have a real cost.
Can't I?
> I too would like it taught in schools, but I also think its important to have reliable sources for the bare facts.

No such thing is possible. Facts are inferred unreliably from physical evidence and (at best) primary sources which are written by people who (claim to have) direct experience, but who also write with agendas.

> It depresses me when I go to the history section in a bookstore and see how much of it is given over to conflicting viewpoints of the same events, so there's (almost) different versions of history available depending on what you already like to believe

I don't know how you'd expect it to be otherwise; if you look at first-person accounts of current events, its clear that agendas and biases shape them, and history is largely what is pieced together from those kinds of accounts (often fragments of those kinds of accounts!) plus fragmentary physical evidence. Even if historians didn't have their own biases, there's multiple self-narratives that can be reconstructed to explain the evidence historians work from and no foolproof way to choose the right one from among those.
This made me recall Meilir Page-Jones' book "Practical Project Management" from way back...

"Second, employees who are truly competent and are eager to make a genuine contribution to the department soon resign from a mediocracy, leaving behind them the dross of nonproducers and internecine warriors. I term this effect the Inverse Gresham’s Law: A mediocracy hoards mediocre people and drives good people into general circulation."

http://www.waysys.com/book-excerpts/ppm-ch15.html
> why would it be unacceptable

It's not unacceptable, just weird. Many people may not agree that diversity should supercede meritocracy in a company.
> Fluency on the command line is a skill that is in some ways archaic...

I don't see this to be the case at all. Plus, having this be the opening line may cause people to equate archaic=I don't need this.

I'd suggest (would pull request but afk) that you remove "is a skill that is in some ways archaic".
Slip is defined by relative displacement, not absolute displacement. See http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/glossary/?termID=174 for verification. So in a 20 foot slip, neither side actually moved 20 feet.

Secondly it is very important that the tube remain still while the pylons move relative to it. Don't forget that we have objects moving down that tube at close to the speed of sound. It doesn't take a large local kink to be a fatal problem for people inside. You really don't want that tube to move. Enough so that keeping the tube still that it is an explicit design consideration to keep it still while the pylons expand and contract for thermal reasons.

Thirdly I well know that earthquakes are generally less of problems underground than on the surface. But trading an easy problem in most places with an impossible problem at fault boundaries is hardly an improvement. That is why I have only focused on the potentially impossible problem.

Fourth, your response was just as much an appeal to authority as mine. But my appeal to authority was an appeal to authorities whose credentials are independently verifiable, whose conclusions have been put up for public comment, and which other authorities have independently questioned, criticized, and mostly verified. Your authority is based on an anonymous claim of expertise made on the internet, in a thread where you made a basic mistake about how earthquakes are measured, with no actual analysis backing it up.

Which authority is more believable?
Yes, and I'd consider Google, Apple, and Facebook huge targets with major compromise risk as well. People tell me Google security is absolutely without equal, but when it's hacked, I, for one, will be unsurprised.

With cloud services hacks, there is no "if"s, only "when"s.
I don't know about the ldap patch.

But the second one is a patch I sent to OpenBSD. Apparently the portable version of sudo keeps an up-to-date copy of this file.

Sudo is a super useful tool, and Todd has made a wonderful job at maintaining it for the past 20 years or so.

Most opensource projects have only one maintainer. This is not necessarily a bad thing; it oftens allows them to iterate quickly.
And it doesn't mean the code is only read by one pair of eyeballs either. In particuler, sudo is part of OpenBSD, and other OpenBSD developers take a look at the changes when a new version gets merged.
1Password.

Sure, it's not free but well worth it to me in this case. I also chose not to sync using Dropbox but wifi sync and BTsync instead. So, no copy ends up in the cloud but cross-platform passwords with mostly minimal pain.
Into the Deep Freeze: What Kind of Person Gets Cryonically Preserved?
I wonder when people will realize "better experience" is not a universally good excuse for chipping away at security (and privacy).
> They're not First Amendment issues

So you and parent both agree that the economist is wrong by invoking the constitution?
Criptext secure email platform raises $500,000
+1 for 1Password.

I sync across multiple computers just fine using BTSync. I only use Wifi sync to sync from 1 computer to my multiple iOS devices.
The tweet/50 followers reference was to Justine Sacco's case:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tw...

She made a fairly lame joke that, interpreted charitably, is skewering her own white privilege.

But people got hold of it and interpreted it to me she was a horrifying racist. They generated a twitter mob and got her employer to fire her.

Freedom of association doesn't enter into it. It was mob justice, and her employer caved.

Social media has resurrected the mob. We as a society haven't figured out how to respond to it.

Do you think that what happened to Justine Sacco was "good" or "fine". Maybe you do, in which case we simply differ on principle.

But I want to make sure you think it's fine for twitter mobs to converge on a single human at random and single them out for extreme social consequences.

(Granted, the Economist article doesn't really touch on this, but it's what the parent poster was referring to. Twitter mobs tend to impose harsh consequences over fairly inconsequential issues.)
Congratulations for reading the article and exacting content.

I think the meta observation is there are rules imposed on students to prevent them from developing bad habits. But these aren't hard rules in practice. Same applies to code slopping.
Bruce cites removal of the diffuser as a specific reason he no longer thinks Bitlocker is OK. If that's really what he thinks, why doesn't he say exactly why? There are practical attacks on Bitlocker without the diffuser, but Ferguson stated he didn't believe there would be with the diffuser (in the original Bitlocker paper, I think).

Your explanation, that the diffuser doesn't make it Hard, is understandable and it's not something I'd worry about. And the way you phrase it, it seems unarguable and straightforward that it isn't a big deal, that no one should ever rely on FDE for integrity. But Bruce understands a lot more than me, and he's citing this as a big deal. And MS/Ferguson originally made a big deal out of it. So was it always just a useless add-on? Wouldn't someone have published a paper showing how Elephant doesn't really help? Certainly a practical attack on it would be notable?

I hope you can appreciate my confusion.
Lastpass was hacked – change your password and share this
> I think depression has a similar role.

Why? I can't see any basis for your belief other than "it just makes sense to me", which is the epistemology of bloodletting and witchburning.

Evolutionary just-so stories have been so thoroughly and repeatedly debunked that no one thinks they can be evidence for anything. They may be useful motivators for testable ideas, but that's all.

So where is your evidence, your clinical studies, your field observations? Anything. You've said that you believe clinical depression--a serious and even deadly disease--is caused by the brain trying to tell you there is something you need to change in your life, and given zero evidence for it. You've barely even motivated it.

Under those circumstances, one either has to assume bad faith, or an astonishing level of hubris and myopia. I'd say the person who responded to you was being rather generous, given what you've said is equivalent to, "It just makes sense to me that your cancer is just your body's way of saying that you need to change something important in your life, at least in the cases I've seen."

Anecdata ("the cases I've seen") is not evidence for anything, because we all know that humans are terrible observers and prone to confirmation bias and other problematic behaviours, so telling us "no really I saw this!" is not evidence of anything except what a naive observer believes, and again: that kind of thinking is what informed pre-scientific medicine for thousands of years, resulting in a vast amount of misery and very few effective treatments.
> Besides that, you might want to add a 301 URL redirect to your web server to force people to only use SSL and avoid the fatal mistake of someone forgetting to type http_s_.

Is there any advantage of this over doing it at a DNS level?
Reusing passwords is not a crime.*

*Unless it's your email password or your bank password, basically.

People have been scared into this "unique password for every site", but let's be honest: My Hacker News password getting hacked doesn't cost me anything. Why does it need a unique password with some random other forum I comment on that has no personal information on it?
My takeaway- the VC's have leveraged the money from their successes to create a vortex that sucks in money from consumers, into privately owned companies, back into VC pockets, and back into more companies that get more people to spend more money.

The tech vortex that is sucking away quality of life from the middle class and padding the billionaires (and large company) bank accounts. Throwing out a few bones on occasion (fewer and fewer) to entrepreneurs to keep the vortex going.

Vortex is the opposite of bubble, but it does the same thing to the life of the average person.
"You're looking to conflate the two, and gain social protections from legal authorities, not social authorities."

He specifically does not do this.
They already are. They're an identity store.

You leverage your facebook profile to gain access to properties, be given permissions or access, and your value is measurable by the input output of your usage.

Travel around the world right now and show either your government identification or a printed copy of your facebook profile and wouldn't it be weird if a young person you meet takes more credibility from that printed page than the validity and authority of your government id?
Leaving the OS/hardware market and focus on services.
In practice, there are almost always offerings for employees to liquidate at roughly the same benchmarks that an IPO would have reached.
Fracking to blame? Alabama earthquakes occurring near shale-gas developments
Thanks for posting those, their splash page gave me the feeling that you were always responsible for the docker mental overhead.
> The second is that I don't believe that this is actually happening.

This article[0] posted elsewhere in this thread reveals a high school principal recently lost his job for saying "He did nothing wrong. He was afraid for his life, I commend him for his actions." in response to the McKinney story. So not only is it happening, it's apparently getting worse.

[0] - http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/fla-principal-sacke...
This doesn't really directly address the issue of valuations for the unicorns. P/E valuations are probably insane by most metrics - the type of user base growth required to get them in line (P/E wise) with other companies is on the order of double-digit percentages of the global population IIRC.

This doesn't really mean there's a "tech bubble", though. It's possible we'll see a massive correction to those companies, but it will likely be isolated, and thanks to the weird structuring of these private equity deals I can't imagine that the VCs will be much worse off.
Watching an ad is paying a price. If it's possible to get something for free without breaking the law and without other tangible negative consequences for yourself, why would you pay a price? Altruism, right? So watching ads is my altruistic duty now?
Oh, I agree with everything you just said. I was just wondering what it looks like from a career progression standpoint. If it's just titles, it's tough.

What you said about those cross-cutting problems and all that is spot on and that is basically what I see sr. engineers and architects. However, how do we or should we even further delineate career progression and responsibilities? And what does that look like? What is beyond those things?