Datasets:

OpenPipe

/

best-hn-comment-pairs-v2

like 0

Follow

OpenPipe 25

train

<story><title>ARIN Finally Runs Out of IPv4 Addresses</title><url>http://www.networkworld.com/article/2985340/ipv6/arin-finally-runs-out-of-ipv4-addresses.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>msbarnett</author><text>&amp;gt; What am I missing?&lt;p&gt;A few things.&lt;p&gt;There&amp;#x27;s only 4,294,967,296 addresses in IPv4, so if you hand out giant blocks, you run out quite fast, whereas with 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 you could hand out huge IPv4 &amp;#x2F;8 sized blocks from now until the heat death of the sun if you wanted to.&lt;p&gt;But there&amp;#x27;s more to it than that. Right now only 1&amp;#x2F;8th of the IPv6 address space is &amp;quot;assigned to the internet&amp;quot;, so there&amp;#x27;s effectively 7&amp;#x2F;8ths being held in reserve for the foreseable future -- this is partially to accommodate realistic router memory limits in the near term. IPv6 also has a more efficient hierarchical routing scheme than CIDR (which was kind of bolted on to IPv4 after-the-fact), which helps keep router tables from consuming terabytes of RAM. And IPv6 is designed to be more easily renumberable when we &lt;i&gt;do&lt;/i&gt; make mistakes with assignments, with a clear separation between subnet prefix all that requires is changing the routing prefix.&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day, with 340 trillion trillion trillion addresses, handing out too many isn&amp;#x27;t ever going to be a big worry in the foreseeable lifetime of...anything, really.</text></item><item><author>thaumasiotes</author><text>I have a hard time seeing how IPv6 solves this problem. If we allocate them all individually, we have a world-shattering routing table problem. If we allocate them in gargantuan blocks, we have the same problem we have now with IPv4 -- we can&amp;#x27;t reallocate because routing becomes an impossible task. What am I missing? We&amp;#x27;re certainly not going to get the allocation right by doing it all at the beginning.</text></item><item><author>msbarnett</author><text>Because address allocation is inefficient and it is impractical to address this inefficiency in IPv4.&lt;p&gt;ARIN is out but your ISP has extras. Why doesn&amp;#x27;t your ISP sell its extras, since a scarce resource should have monetary value?&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Routing tables&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;p&gt;Selling individual IPs off piecemeal isn&amp;#x27;t practical because routers simply do not have enough RAM to handle the enormous routing tables that would resultantly be necessary in order for packets to find their destinations.</text></item><item><author>lordnacho</author><text>If IP addresses are scarce, why does it not seem to cost me anything to get one? I&amp;#x27;ve had a bunch of online servers that came with a static IP, and an ISP service that came with one, at various times. It seldom seemed to be explicitly priced, and when it was the price was not really something worth considering.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>aexaey</author><text>The statement about IPv6 [internet] having 2^128 addresses is completely and utterly untrue, in the same way as it would be untrue to claim that IPv4 [internet] have 2^48 TCP ports.&lt;p&gt;What IPv6 have address-space-wise, is 2^64 subnets, out of which 2^61 is actually allocated to be routable over public internet.&lt;p&gt;Then comes granularity of &amp;#x2F;48 allocations (= 2^16 subnets) to end users and &amp;#x2F;32 allocations (= 2^32 subnets) to ISPs. That gives just 2^45 end users and 2^29 ISPs at best. In practice, if handing a user a &amp;#x2F;48 would become a common practice, all medium and large IPSs would start accumulating multiple &amp;#x2F;32s, then routing concerns would come back, and largest ISPs will start aggregating to &amp;#x2F;28s or &amp;#x2F;24s or whatnot.&lt;p&gt;That is still a whole lot of addresses (and IPv4 still looks laughably small in comparison), but actual, practical numbers are way, way lower then &amp;quot;340 undecillion&amp;quot; marketing figure being plastered all over the place.</text></comment>

<story><title>ARIN Finally Runs Out of IPv4 Addresses</title><url>http://www.networkworld.com/article/2985340/ipv6/arin-finally-runs-out-of-ipv4-addresses.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>msbarnett</author><text>&amp;gt; What am I missing?&lt;p&gt;A few things.&lt;p&gt;There&amp;#x27;s only 4,294,967,296 addresses in IPv4, so if you hand out giant blocks, you run out quite fast, whereas with 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 you could hand out huge IPv4 &amp;#x2F;8 sized blocks from now until the heat death of the sun if you wanted to.&lt;p&gt;But there&amp;#x27;s more to it than that. Right now only 1&amp;#x2F;8th of the IPv6 address space is &amp;quot;assigned to the internet&amp;quot;, so there&amp;#x27;s effectively 7&amp;#x2F;8ths being held in reserve for the foreseable future -- this is partially to accommodate realistic router memory limits in the near term. IPv6 also has a more efficient hierarchical routing scheme than CIDR (which was kind of bolted on to IPv4 after-the-fact), which helps keep router tables from consuming terabytes of RAM. And IPv6 is designed to be more easily renumberable when we &lt;i&gt;do&lt;/i&gt; make mistakes with assignments, with a clear separation between subnet prefix all that requires is changing the routing prefix.&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day, with 340 trillion trillion trillion addresses, handing out too many isn&amp;#x27;t ever going to be a big worry in the foreseeable lifetime of...anything, really.</text></item><item><author>thaumasiotes</author><text>I have a hard time seeing how IPv6 solves this problem. If we allocate them all individually, we have a world-shattering routing table problem. If we allocate them in gargantuan blocks, we have the same problem we have now with IPv4 -- we can&amp;#x27;t reallocate because routing becomes an impossible task. What am I missing? We&amp;#x27;re certainly not going to get the allocation right by doing it all at the beginning.</text></item><item><author>msbarnett</author><text>Because address allocation is inefficient and it is impractical to address this inefficiency in IPv4.&lt;p&gt;ARIN is out but your ISP has extras. Why doesn&amp;#x27;t your ISP sell its extras, since a scarce resource should have monetary value?&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Routing tables&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;p&gt;Selling individual IPs off piecemeal isn&amp;#x27;t practical because routers simply do not have enough RAM to handle the enormous routing tables that would resultantly be necessary in order for packets to find their destinations.</text></item><item><author>lordnacho</author><text>If IP addresses are scarce, why does it not seem to cost me anything to get one? I&amp;#x27;ve had a bunch of online servers that came with a static IP, and an ISP service that came with one, at various times. It seldom seemed to be explicitly priced, and when it was the price was not really something worth considering.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Sophira</author><text>The fact that only 1&amp;#x2F;8th is assigned to &amp;quot;the Internet&amp;quot; right now is worrying. After all, we know how that worked out with the 240.0.0.0&amp;#x2F;4 range in IPv4 - it was reserved for future use, but was never able to be used because by the time it would have been useful, everything classed it as non-routable. It&amp;#x27;s a huge swath of addresses that just can&amp;#x27;t be used.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Bookstore Chain Borders is Dead</title><url>http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2011/07/18/its-almost-official-borders-is-dead/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>wheels</author><text>I can&apos;t tell if bookstores have gotten markedly worse or if I&apos;ve simply become more discriminating in what I&apos;m looking for. When Barnes and Noble, Borders, et al first swept through the US I thought it was wonderful. I&apos;ve spent an inordinate amount of money and time in big-box bookstores.&lt;p&gt;I moved to Germany some 9 years ago. In my first trips back to the US a bookstore was one of the detours I was most excited about. I&apos;d typically return to Germany with a couple hundred bucks worth of books stuffed into my bag. My family, noticing this, started a habit of buying me B&amp;#38;N gift certificates (a pattern that&apos;s continued to this day).&lt;p&gt;But now, 9 years and thousands of dollars of Amazon.de purchases later, I can&apos;t say that I&apos;m terribly excited about visiting the big box stores. I struggled to spend my most recent gift certificate. &lt;i&gt;Struggled!&lt;/i&gt; I went looking for books on Chinese history, and in a two story Barnes and Noble in an upscale Houston neighborhood there were &lt;i&gt;two&lt;/i&gt; books on the history of the most populous country in the world. There were huge aisles of random throwaway junk, games and other silliness and &lt;i&gt;two books on Chinese history&lt;/i&gt;. Nor did they have Bertrand Russel&apos;s &lt;i&gt;Principles of Mathematics&lt;/i&gt; or Aldous Huxley&apos;s &lt;i&gt;Chrome Yellow&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;p&gt;I love books. Paper books. I have around a thousand of them. But I won&apos;t cry for the passing of the big-box stores if they&apos;re bent on becoming the Wal-Mart of reading.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>makmanalp</author><text>I&apos;ll bring in another perspective. I&apos;m in a huge dilemma.&lt;p&gt;I love books. I also like paper books, but I believe that in the long run we&apos;re better off without them for economic and environmental reasons, and e-books are a pretty darned good alternative. I think that the inherent value of a book is its contents. Whether it is tangible or not doesn&apos;t matter as much.&lt;p&gt;Because of this, I think book romanticism is pretty stupid. However, I can&apos;t help but feel captivated by it. I have a few theories on why this may be so:&lt;p&gt;I do like that my books are tangible possessions, that I can look back at the notes my father made into them in college, that I can find an old train pass I used as a bookmark that brings back memories. Or I know that that mark is from when I spilled coffee all over my theory of computation book when I fell asleep studying for the final. I associate my books with other things, thoughts. Currently this doesn&apos;t quite work this way with e-books. That&apos;s why they don&apos;t feel &quot;personal&quot;. This can be remedied, but I don&apos;t know to what extent.&lt;p&gt;I don&apos;t give a damn about big box stores, but I care very much about my local stores. The difference is in experience. When I&apos;m buying a book, I don&apos;t want to feel like I&apos;m a standardized entity there to benefit a company whose sole purpose is to maximize profits. The alternative to this what I can only describe as &quot;intellectual flirtation&quot;.&lt;p&gt;Example: Today I happened to have some free time and I wandered into my favorite bookstore. I looked around, grabbed a book about Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and sat in a corner reading for an hour. No one nagged me to buy anything. The book was well written but it wasn&apos;t as comprehensive as I hoped, so I moved to the fiction section, and onto mathematics, dipping into books as I wished. Finally, I found a book about the role of Tea in Japanese culture and decided to buy it. While I was paying, the cashier struck up a conversation with me about the book itself and we had a small debate about the topic and he also recommended another author to me.&lt;p&gt;Now, as you can see the act of going to a bookstore is not a thing I do just to buy books. I do it so I can have a change of scenery and pace, relax, learn and have some personal time to just think (when do we do that, seriously?). I also do it because it&apos;s profoundly social (i.e. not web 2.0 style &quot;me too&quot; social). I like conversing about the things I find interesting, and it seems bookstores gather people like me, whether they work there or just visit to buy. Finally, the cost of all this is a possible few extra dollars on my book.&lt;p&gt;It&apos;s a tough choice for me.</text></comment>

<story><title>Bookstore Chain Borders is Dead</title><url>http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2011/07/18/its-almost-official-borders-is-dead/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>wheels</author><text>I can&apos;t tell if bookstores have gotten markedly worse or if I&apos;ve simply become more discriminating in what I&apos;m looking for. When Barnes and Noble, Borders, et al first swept through the US I thought it was wonderful. I&apos;ve spent an inordinate amount of money and time in big-box bookstores.&lt;p&gt;I moved to Germany some 9 years ago. In my first trips back to the US a bookstore was one of the detours I was most excited about. I&apos;d typically return to Germany with a couple hundred bucks worth of books stuffed into my bag. My family, noticing this, started a habit of buying me B&amp;#38;N gift certificates (a pattern that&apos;s continued to this day).&lt;p&gt;But now, 9 years and thousands of dollars of Amazon.de purchases later, I can&apos;t say that I&apos;m terribly excited about visiting the big box stores. I struggled to spend my most recent gift certificate. &lt;i&gt;Struggled!&lt;/i&gt; I went looking for books on Chinese history, and in a two story Barnes and Noble in an upscale Houston neighborhood there were &lt;i&gt;two&lt;/i&gt; books on the history of the most populous country in the world. There were huge aisles of random throwaway junk, games and other silliness and &lt;i&gt;two books on Chinese history&lt;/i&gt;. Nor did they have Bertrand Russel&apos;s &lt;i&gt;Principles of Mathematics&lt;/i&gt; or Aldous Huxley&apos;s &lt;i&gt;Chrome Yellow&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;p&gt;I love books. Paper books. I have around a thousand of them. But I won&apos;t cry for the passing of the big-box stores if they&apos;re bent on becoming the Wal-Mart of reading.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>panacea</author><text>&amp;#62;But I won&apos;t cry for the passing of the big-box stores if they&apos;re bent on becoming the Wal-Mart of reading.&lt;p&gt;There&apos;s likely some bad decision making behind a move towards a &apos;Wal-Mart-ification&apos; of the big-box stores, but are you sure they could have survived if they tried to compete with the advantages of a warehouse full of diverse stock and shelf space that is virtual and costs nothing to expand by adding pages (ala Amazon).&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that they&apos;ve acted more like fish in a pond that&apos;s been drying up. Struggling to stay in a deep enough spot to keep breathing.&lt;p&gt;I get a better price, better selection and more information browsing Amazon, but I&apos;m not about to blame the physical book stores for going out of business because &lt;i&gt;they changed&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;man&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;p&gt;Related: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2011/07/12/the-secret-bookstore/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2011/07/12/the-secret-boo...&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

train

<story><title>A phone the FBI sold to criminals</title><url>https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7b4gg/anom-phone-arcaneos-fbi-backdoor</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>sergiomattei</author><text>Aight, this is some next-level stuff.&lt;p&gt;Hell, I&amp;#x27;d even call it badass. The FBI created a tech startup (even with the .io domain!) and sold devices with a custom Android distribution.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s funny because you can search for the XDA-Developers thread mentioned in the article, they were pretty shocked to find a phone with modded software and a locked bootloader.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>bserge</author><text>It is pretty impressive, they made a whole company marketing secure phones, except the devices were wiretapped.&lt;p&gt;Aside from that, it sounds like a pretty decent secure phone, too.&lt;p&gt;Did they hire one of those TV show genius detectives to plan all this?&lt;p&gt;It sure seems more advanced than the usual FBI operations (or maybe we don&amp;#x27;t hear much about the good ones).</text></comment>

<story><title>A phone the FBI sold to criminals</title><url>https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7b4gg/anom-phone-arcaneos-fbi-backdoor</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>sergiomattei</author><text>Aight, this is some next-level stuff.&lt;p&gt;Hell, I&amp;#x27;d even call it badass. The FBI created a tech startup (even with the .io domain!) and sold devices with a custom Android distribution.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s funny because you can search for the XDA-Developers thread mentioned in the article, they were pretty shocked to find a phone with modded software and a locked bootloader.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>34679</author><text>There are few limits to what one can accomplish with legal impunity and other people&amp;#x27;s money.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>You Don&apos;t Batch Cook When You&apos;re Suicidal (2020)</title><url>https://cookingonabootstrap.com/2020/07/30/the-price-of-potatoes-and-the-value-of-compassion/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>WendyTheWillow</author><text>And a lot of people would be very wrong. There’s a floor to survivability, below which you can’t keep yourself alive, but there is no ceiling. If everyone is above the floor, there’s no reason for concern about those looking for the ceiling.&lt;p&gt;In the future we’ll pull people up to the floor, but that doesn’t require attaching a ceiling. The will never be a successful society that substantially punishes achievement above a certain point.</text></item><item><author>lwhi</author><text>Better at sports .. but I bet there&amp;#x27;s a fairly even distribution between people who have money and don&amp;#x27;t.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; In the future, we may view enormous disparities in wealth as evil as we do racism today.&lt;p&gt;A lot of people already do.</text></item><item><author>dcist</author><text>Some people are indeed much better. Anyone who played sports as a kid understands this. Huge differences are immediately apparent in small children. But generally, I agree that, for most life tasks, the differences between people are not enormous. Humanity could do a much better job eliminating poverty. In the future, we may view enormous disparities in wealth as evil as we do racism today.</text></item><item><author>thiago_fm</author><text>That&amp;#x27;s one big paradox.&lt;p&gt;Coming from poverty, I work with plenty of talented people, but nowhere as talented as the people I&amp;#x27;ve studied in shitty schools.&lt;p&gt;Now most of those people from my poverty times continue to be poor, because of many problems poverty brought to them. I can clearly see that, and that I was the lucky one to find a way up many times.&lt;p&gt;Yet, my new social circle believe that I&amp;#x27;m talented because of my DNA and efforts, and blame others for their poverty.&lt;p&gt;But I know that those people making &amp;quot;poor&amp;quot; decisions in the view of riches are actually just trying to survive. With themselves, with the baggage they carry, and to the fact that they weren&amp;#x27;t as lucky as me.&lt;p&gt;Talent, intelligence is literally everywhere. People that are awesome and ambitious is abundant.&lt;p&gt;Nobody is really much better than others, but America post-ww2 managed to sell this idea to everyone, including many really smart and talented folks, that think they are gifted.&lt;p&gt;To sum up, nobody chooses to be poor and humanity could progress faster if we focused instead in eliminating poverty, creating more possibilities for everyone...&lt;p&gt;Than believing almost trillionaries will guide us to where we need it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>matthewmacleod</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m not really sure that &amp;quot;it&amp;#x27;s okay if the billionares have space palaces so long as the poor aren&amp;#x27;t literally dying&amp;quot; is the optimal economic philosophy.</text></comment>

<story><title>You Don&apos;t Batch Cook When You&apos;re Suicidal (2020)</title><url>https://cookingonabootstrap.com/2020/07/30/the-price-of-potatoes-and-the-value-of-compassion/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>WendyTheWillow</author><text>And a lot of people would be very wrong. There’s a floor to survivability, below which you can’t keep yourself alive, but there is no ceiling. If everyone is above the floor, there’s no reason for concern about those looking for the ceiling.&lt;p&gt;In the future we’ll pull people up to the floor, but that doesn’t require attaching a ceiling. The will never be a successful society that substantially punishes achievement above a certain point.</text></item><item><author>lwhi</author><text>Better at sports .. but I bet there&amp;#x27;s a fairly even distribution between people who have money and don&amp;#x27;t.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; In the future, we may view enormous disparities in wealth as evil as we do racism today.&lt;p&gt;A lot of people already do.</text></item><item><author>dcist</author><text>Some people are indeed much better. Anyone who played sports as a kid understands this. Huge differences are immediately apparent in small children. But generally, I agree that, for most life tasks, the differences between people are not enormous. Humanity could do a much better job eliminating poverty. In the future, we may view enormous disparities in wealth as evil as we do racism today.</text></item><item><author>thiago_fm</author><text>That&amp;#x27;s one big paradox.&lt;p&gt;Coming from poverty, I work with plenty of talented people, but nowhere as talented as the people I&amp;#x27;ve studied in shitty schools.&lt;p&gt;Now most of those people from my poverty times continue to be poor, because of many problems poverty brought to them. I can clearly see that, and that I was the lucky one to find a way up many times.&lt;p&gt;Yet, my new social circle believe that I&amp;#x27;m talented because of my DNA and efforts, and blame others for their poverty.&lt;p&gt;But I know that those people making &amp;quot;poor&amp;quot; decisions in the view of riches are actually just trying to survive. With themselves, with the baggage they carry, and to the fact that they weren&amp;#x27;t as lucky as me.&lt;p&gt;Talent, intelligence is literally everywhere. People that are awesome and ambitious is abundant.&lt;p&gt;Nobody is really much better than others, but America post-ww2 managed to sell this idea to everyone, including many really smart and talented folks, that think they are gifted.&lt;p&gt;To sum up, nobody chooses to be poor and humanity could progress faster if we focused instead in eliminating poverty, creating more possibilities for everyone...&lt;p&gt;Than believing almost trillionaries will guide us to where we need it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>klabb3</author><text>Depends how much the people at the top (money-wise) are playing zero-sum games. If they are, to a large extent, engaging in asset acquisitions and passive growth of eg real estate, or monopolistic protectionism, then there’s plenty of room for others to engage in activities with positive externalities instead.&lt;p&gt;There’s no question a lot of people don’t get the opportunity to pursue their niche passions and drives, based on a bad birth lottery ticket. There’s a lot of wasted potential in countries that reduce aperture of the early success funnels.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Tips from the Pragmatic Programmer (2000)</title><url>https://pragprog.com/the-pragmatic-programmer/extracts/tips</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>dllthomas</author><text>&lt;i&gt;&amp;quot;DRY—Don’t Repeat Yourself Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.&amp;quot;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Always good to revisit original phrasings of things. I think the catchiness of the lower-information acronym did this one a disservice. I find myself explaining with some regularity that repetition of code is not &lt;i&gt;necessarily&lt;/i&gt; repetition of ideas, and if I have `f(x, g(y), h(z))` both here and there &lt;i&gt;but for different reasons&lt;/i&gt; then it&amp;#x27;s introducing artificial coupling to break it out into a single function. The focus, in the longer expression, on &lt;i&gt;knowledge&lt;/i&gt; is exactly right. DRY isn&amp;#x27;t a call for &amp;quot;Huffman coding&amp;quot;.</text></comment>

<story><title>Tips from the Pragmatic Programmer (2000)</title><url>https://pragprog.com/the-pragmatic-programmer/extracts/tips</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>lliamander</author><text>&amp;gt; Provide Options, Don’t Make Lame Excuses&lt;p&gt;This has helped my career more than any other single piece of advice. The critical mindset of the engineer can quickly lead to cynicism (especially when faced with bureaucracy). Don&amp;#x27;t get me wrong; cynics make great advisors. But the money is in solving problems, not (merely) pointing them out.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Udp.c in Linux kernel pre-4.5 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code</title><url>https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-10229#vulnDescriptionTitle</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>cyann</author><text>Red Hat (RHEL 5&amp;#x2F;6&amp;#x2F;7) not affected: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;access.redhat.com&amp;#x2F;security&amp;#x2F;cve&amp;#x2F;CVE-2016-10229&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;access.redhat.com&amp;#x2F;security&amp;#x2F;cve&amp;#x2F;CVE-2016-10229&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;Highest impact is on Android: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;source.android.com&amp;#x2F;security&amp;#x2F;bulletin&amp;#x2F;2017-04-01&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;source.android.com&amp;#x2F;security&amp;#x2F;bulletin&amp;#x2F;2017-04-01&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

<story><title>Udp.c in Linux kernel pre-4.5 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code</title><url>https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-10229#vulnDescriptionTitle</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>danielparks</author><text>Looks like this was patched a while ago in both RedHat and Debian distros.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;access.redhat.com&amp;#x2F;security&amp;#x2F;cve&amp;#x2F;cve-2016-10229&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;access.redhat.com&amp;#x2F;security&amp;#x2F;cve&amp;#x2F;cve-2016-10229&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;security-tracker.debian.org&amp;#x2F;tracker&amp;#x2F;CVE-2016-10229&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;security-tracker.debian.org&amp;#x2F;tracker&amp;#x2F;CVE-2016-10229&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Theo de Raadt summarizes the OpenBSD IPSec &quot;backdoor&quot; situation</title><url>http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&amp;m=129296046123471&amp;w=2</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lenni</author><text>People often complain about his erratic and uncontrollable behaviour, but I find Theo de Raadt comes across entirely reasonable in this message.&lt;p&gt;What&apos;s the history there?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dylanz</author><text>He&apos;s a very opinionated person. Just a personality type. There are others in the industry, like Linus, Zed, etc. Theo can be very direct, and throw in some spice for flavor.&lt;p&gt;Personally, I jive with these personality types, and, think Theo is a fantastic fit for OpenBSD.</text></comment>

<story><title>Theo de Raadt summarizes the OpenBSD IPSec &quot;backdoor&quot; situation</title><url>http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&amp;m=129296046123471&amp;w=2</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lenni</author><text>People often complain about his erratic and uncontrollable behaviour, but I find Theo de Raadt comes across entirely reasonable in this message.&lt;p&gt;What&apos;s the history there?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tedunangst</author><text>Complaining about Theo is one of those things you do to prove you&apos;re tuned into the scene. Other people have read similar complaints, see your comment and think &quot;hey, this guy knows something&quot;, and presto! Instant upvotes.&lt;p&gt;Truth by consensus.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Nobody Likes the “Idea Guy”</title><url>https://www.riskology.co/idea-guy/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lkrubner</author><text>About &amp;quot;idea guys&amp;quot;. During World War II, after the defeat at Dunkirk, Britain formed a national government, headed by Winston Churchill. This was not a Conservative government, but rather, was national, in that all parties were invited to participate. A number of MPs suggested that, to increase participation of small parties, Churchill should appoint a few &amp;quot;Ministers Without Portfolio&amp;quot;. He absolutely refused. He had previous experience with this and thought it was a disaster. &amp;quot;Ministers Without Portfolio&amp;quot; became &amp;quot;idea guys&amp;quot;. In meetings, they made lots of suggestions, and they held up conversations with their ideas, but they were not in charge of anything so they never really had to take responsibility when things went wrong. Perhaps worst of all, in Churchill&amp;#x27;s view, because such ministers had no real responsibilities, they aggravated everyone else by asking questions about what the ministers with real responsibilities were up to.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>maxxxxx</author><text>&amp;quot; &amp;quot;idea guys&amp;quot;. In meetings, they made lots of suggestions, and they held up conversations with their ideas, but they were not in charge of anything so they never really had to take responsibility when things went wrong&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;Reminds me of a whole layer of people at corporate headquarters of my company. They send out beautiful newsletters, hold seminars and meetings about all kinds of stuff but as soon as it has been published it fizzles out and nothing comes out of it.</text></comment>

<story><title>Nobody Likes the “Idea Guy”</title><url>https://www.riskology.co/idea-guy/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lkrubner</author><text>About &amp;quot;idea guys&amp;quot;. During World War II, after the defeat at Dunkirk, Britain formed a national government, headed by Winston Churchill. This was not a Conservative government, but rather, was national, in that all parties were invited to participate. A number of MPs suggested that, to increase participation of small parties, Churchill should appoint a few &amp;quot;Ministers Without Portfolio&amp;quot;. He absolutely refused. He had previous experience with this and thought it was a disaster. &amp;quot;Ministers Without Portfolio&amp;quot; became &amp;quot;idea guys&amp;quot;. In meetings, they made lots of suggestions, and they held up conversations with their ideas, but they were not in charge of anything so they never really had to take responsibility when things went wrong. Perhaps worst of all, in Churchill&amp;#x27;s view, because such ministers had no real responsibilities, they aggravated everyone else by asking questions about what the ministers with real responsibilities were up to.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>NeedMoreTea</author><text>Of course Churchill was perhaps one of the biggest idea guys of the lot. He did plenty, but he also interfered and had bad ideas a plenty too. Thankfully, he was mostly open to being told to butt out.&lt;p&gt;The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare (SOE) was a famous Churchill enthusiasm, yet he had many useless impractical ones, that were a huge distraction, too.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Swift&apos;s Evolution</title><url>https://carpeaqua.com/2017/06/02/swifts-evolution/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>AsyncAwait</author><text>I think the author misses the fact that Swift wasn&amp;#x27;t truly &amp;#x27;done&amp;#x27; when it was introduced, (and still isn&amp;#x27;t). Objective-C had some 30+ years to evolve, but Swift can&amp;#x27;t have 3?&lt;p&gt;I get that if you&amp;#x27;re shipping Swift in production you want to refactor as little as possible, but it is pretty hard to come up with the ideal design straight out of the gate. Swift can stop evolving, but it will be THEN when it loses the reason to exist. If Swift is just going to be ObjC with a nicer syntax, (or the features that YOU personally find desirable), then why bother with it at all? Swift is trying to get its design right and that takes time, at the same time I wouldn&amp;#x27;t want to be stuck with a poorly designed language for the next 30 years, so it&amp;#x27;s worth the current turbulence for me.&lt;p&gt;(Rust was the same way 2011-2015 to a MUCH bigger degree and it did in fact eventually stabilize as promised.)&lt;p&gt;If it&amp;#x27;s that much of a problem, ObjC isn&amp;#x27;t going anywhere, it&amp;#x27;s your choice.&lt;p&gt;EDIT: Fixed a typo.</text></comment>

<story><title>Swift&apos;s Evolution</title><url>https://carpeaqua.com/2017/06/02/swifts-evolution/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>bsaul</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m actually pretty happy swift moves the server side story forward, because i&amp;#x27;m convinced the &amp;quot;next big language&amp;quot; will have to run on mobile and server. Actually, i think they don&amp;#x27;t go fast enough, especially regarding concurrency ( which on the server goes beyond just providing async await, as lattner said they were aiming at something closer to the actor model).&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;#x27;t think the &amp;quot;maybe objc is still relevant for new project&amp;quot; trend we&amp;#x27;ve been seeing the last few months on HN is going anywhere. I&amp;#x27;m currently in the process of converting a large codebase from objc to swift, and there is absolutely no doubt that the language is WAY better, and brings a lot of safety enhancements as well.&lt;p&gt;The only big remaining pain point now is clearly in the tooling, but now that they&amp;#x27;re stabilized the language a bit more, it&amp;#x27;s probably going to get better fast.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Betty White Dies at 99</title><url>https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ny-betty-white-dead-age-99-tv-icon-20211231-o2zcyf56yrdvvhvwrceinqqwgi-story.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>dorchadas</author><text>18 days away from hitting 100. Such a shame and a sad loss. Hopefully 2022 is better.</text></comment>

<story><title>Betty White Dies at 99</title><url>https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ny-betty-white-dead-age-99-tv-icon-20211231-o2zcyf56yrdvvhvwrceinqqwgi-story.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>junon</author><text>As if 2021 said &amp;quot;not done yet&amp;quot;. What a way to punctuate a terrible year.&lt;p&gt;This one stings.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Tech layoffs exceed 240k so far in 2023, 50% more than 2022</title><url>https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/tech-layoffs-exceed-240000-so-far-in-2023-more-than-50-higher-than-in-all-of-2022/ar-AA1ib3AY</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>dublinben</author><text>The job market is still very strong right now. Don&amp;#x27;t be fooled by stories like this trying to convince you otherwise. The unemployment rate is back down to near-historic lows, under 4 percent.[0] Job openings are down slightly from the peak, but are still well higher than the two decades leading up to 2020.[1]&lt;p&gt;[0] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;fred.stlouisfed.org&amp;#x2F;series&amp;#x2F;UNRATE&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;fred.stlouisfed.org&amp;#x2F;series&amp;#x2F;UNRATE&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;fred.stlouisfed.org&amp;#x2F;series&amp;#x2F;JTSJOL&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noreferrer&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;fred.stlouisfed.org&amp;#x2F;series&amp;#x2F;JTSJOL&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

<story><title>Tech layoffs exceed 240k so far in 2023, 50% more than 2022</title><url>https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/tech-layoffs-exceed-240000-so-far-in-2023-more-than-50-higher-than-in-all-of-2022/ar-AA1ib3AY</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>sidcool</author><text>I worry about my future as a programmer&amp;#x2F;techie. Are the good times over?</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Uber is laying off 3,700, as rides plummet due to Covid-19</title><url>https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/06/uber-is-laying-off-3700-as-rides-plummet-due-to-covid-19/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>hombre_fatal</author><text>Though I&amp;#x27;m kinda glad people who refund delivery food for being cold get kicked off the platform so that more reasonable people who know how to heat food up don&amp;#x27;t have to subsidize you and your expectations.&lt;p&gt;Btw how many times did you heat up and eat the food anyways after getting your refund?</text></item><item><author>Nextgrid</author><text>Same experience here, both with wrong food as well as a bug in the app which caused a cached, previous cart to be ordered instead of the new cart from a different restaurant. I actually provided detailed steps to reproduce this and screenshots and they couldn&amp;#x27;t care less.&lt;p&gt;Both cases ended up with a chargeback.&lt;p&gt;Deliveroo is similar, they banned a 2 year old account used multiple times every day (for both me and my flatmates) with over 2k spent on it for supposed fraud when I dared to ask for &amp;quot;too many&amp;quot; refunds because of cold&amp;#x2F;incorrect food (if you place many orders you have more probability that something goes wrong, but their &amp;quot;fraud&amp;quot; scoring algorithm - that also influences whether you can get one-click refunds directly in the app - doesn&amp;#x27;t seem to take that into account).&lt;p&gt;Both Deliveroo, Just Eat and Uber Eats also often lie and blame the restaurant for being slow when they can&amp;#x27;t assign a driver. I&amp;#x27;ve had multiple occurrences where an order is stuck on &amp;quot;Driver waiting at the restaurant&amp;quot; for 20+ minutes but calling the restaurant reveals that the food was ready long ago and nobody is coming to pick it up.</text></item><item><author>epylar</author><text>I ordered some things from UberEats early on in the quarantine. The restaurants made several errors and eventually UberEats said they wouldn&amp;#x27;t refund because I was having too many issues with my food, and it was &amp;#x27;unlikely&amp;#x27; that a person would have that many issues. So I don&amp;#x27;t use them any more.</text></item><item><author>rockarage</author><text>This is a failure in leadership at UberEats. Uber has more than one revenue source and delivery is in high demand, UberEats is severely losing to DoorDash in food delivery, despite Uber having significantly more resources than DoorDash. Uber has billions in the bank, Doordash only has hundreds of millions. At the time of this posting, Doordash is currently number #13 in the App store, UberEats is sitting at #62. Uber has access to capital and reserve in the bank. Reserves are often used for a rainy day, well it is pouring now. They should be using their position to gain market share during this time of peak demand for deliveries, should not be losing to DoorDash.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>lol636363</author><text>I don&amp;#x27;t think you can make excuses for UberEats or whatever. Food delivery is not a new problem. I have been ordering pizza and Chinese food for more than 2 decades. It is very rare when we received cold pizza. And most of the time when it happened resturants proactively refunded us or gave coupons for another time.&lt;p&gt;It is kind of amazing how many times UberEats, GrubHub, etc deliver cold food. Not just for me but vast majority of my friends report same thing.&lt;p&gt;As a consumer, I rather get refund so bad companies can go bankrupt before becoming too big to fail.</text></comment>

<story><title>Uber is laying off 3,700, as rides plummet due to Covid-19</title><url>https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/06/uber-is-laying-off-3700-as-rides-plummet-due-to-covid-19/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>hombre_fatal</author><text>Though I&amp;#x27;m kinda glad people who refund delivery food for being cold get kicked off the platform so that more reasonable people who know how to heat food up don&amp;#x27;t have to subsidize you and your expectations.&lt;p&gt;Btw how many times did you heat up and eat the food anyways after getting your refund?</text></item><item><author>Nextgrid</author><text>Same experience here, both with wrong food as well as a bug in the app which caused a cached, previous cart to be ordered instead of the new cart from a different restaurant. I actually provided detailed steps to reproduce this and screenshots and they couldn&amp;#x27;t care less.&lt;p&gt;Both cases ended up with a chargeback.&lt;p&gt;Deliveroo is similar, they banned a 2 year old account used multiple times every day (for both me and my flatmates) with over 2k spent on it for supposed fraud when I dared to ask for &amp;quot;too many&amp;quot; refunds because of cold&amp;#x2F;incorrect food (if you place many orders you have more probability that something goes wrong, but their &amp;quot;fraud&amp;quot; scoring algorithm - that also influences whether you can get one-click refunds directly in the app - doesn&amp;#x27;t seem to take that into account).&lt;p&gt;Both Deliveroo, Just Eat and Uber Eats also often lie and blame the restaurant for being slow when they can&amp;#x27;t assign a driver. I&amp;#x27;ve had multiple occurrences where an order is stuck on &amp;quot;Driver waiting at the restaurant&amp;quot; for 20+ minutes but calling the restaurant reveals that the food was ready long ago and nobody is coming to pick it up.</text></item><item><author>epylar</author><text>I ordered some things from UberEats early on in the quarantine. The restaurants made several errors and eventually UberEats said they wouldn&amp;#x27;t refund because I was having too many issues with my food, and it was &amp;#x27;unlikely&amp;#x27; that a person would have that many issues. So I don&amp;#x27;t use them any more.</text></item><item><author>rockarage</author><text>This is a failure in leadership at UberEats. Uber has more than one revenue source and delivery is in high demand, UberEats is severely losing to DoorDash in food delivery, despite Uber having significantly more resources than DoorDash. Uber has billions in the bank, Doordash only has hundreds of millions. At the time of this posting, Doordash is currently number #13 in the App store, UberEats is sitting at #62. Uber has access to capital and reserve in the bank. Reserves are often used for a rainy day, well it is pouring now. They should be using their position to gain market share during this time of peak demand for deliveries, should not be losing to DoorDash.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>onemoresoop</author><text>A restaurant business owner friend of mine is struggling to stay open and he lowered his fees to accept more orders on Seamless&amp;#x2F;Grubhub. Quite a bunch of people order food, receive it on time only to then, in a couple of hours, cancel the order. He filmed himself handing the delivery in to the person who ordered and showed it to the customer reps at Seamless&amp;#x2F;Grubhub and they don&amp;#x27;t do anything about it, he basically has to take the loss, multiple orders a day already. He isn&amp;#x27;t delivering to that address again if they re-order. But, at least here in NYC, there&amp;#x27;s no shortage of people who cancel they orders hours after they eat it.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Will Wright on designing user interfaces to simulation games (1996)</title><url>https://donhopkins.medium.com/designing-user-interfaces-to-simulation-games-bd7a9d81e62d</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>noduerme</author><text>As the presenter in the first video says, Will Wright lead to a &amp;quot;real shift&amp;quot; in the &amp;quot;younger generation&amp;quot; about how &amp;quot;people think about computers and about computing in general&amp;quot;. As a member of the Will Wright generation of 12 year old Mac programmers who tried to take his games apart with ResEdit and tried to make our own, with Perl and HyperCard, this was really resonant, really true.&lt;p&gt;When SimEarth came out, I spent hours and hours just rereading the thick paper manual of how it all worked, because the only places I could play it on the disks were in the computer lab after school, or for an hour a day on the home computer.&lt;p&gt;He turned incredibly complex systems into games and games into systems, so that reading his game manuals made you think about the whole world.&lt;p&gt;One thing sad to me now, with the focus on GPT or Diffusion prompts, is how much kids are no longer thinking about the actual systems or logical rules they&amp;#x27;re playing with, and just learning to trick something that&amp;#x27;s already inscrutable and smarter than them. Mastering AI prompts or even running your own neural net doesn&amp;#x27;t teach anything like logic or the kind of deep, recursive cause and effect structure you could get from Will Wright&amp;#x27;s toys, or even from CK3... even if you get all your prompts perfect to make what you want, it teaches something much more like dependence on a magical oracle than, say, a toy&amp;#x2F;game&amp;#x2F;sim that really encourages you to deconstruct and take pleasure in all its interconnections that you can understand.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>shagie</author><text>&amp;gt; When SimEarth came out, I spent hours and hours just rereading the thick paper manual of how it all worked, because the only places I could play it on the disks were in the computer lab after school, or for an hour a day on the home computer.&lt;p&gt;A copy of the manual can be found at &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;retro-commodore.eu&amp;#x2F;files&amp;#x2F;downloads&amp;#x2F;amigamanuals-xiik.net&amp;#x2F;Games&amp;#x2F;Sim%20Earth%20-%20Manual-ENG.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;retro-commodore.eu&amp;#x2F;files&amp;#x2F;downloads&amp;#x2F;amigamanuals-xiik...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;Page 149 (yes - it had a lot of pages) starts off with &amp;quot;An Introduction to Earth Science&amp;quot; and continues to the appendix on page 201. It has enough content to make a good starter for a grade school science class&amp;#x27;s syllabus.</text></comment>

<story><title>Will Wright on designing user interfaces to simulation games (1996)</title><url>https://donhopkins.medium.com/designing-user-interfaces-to-simulation-games-bd7a9d81e62d</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>noduerme</author><text>As the presenter in the first video says, Will Wright lead to a &amp;quot;real shift&amp;quot; in the &amp;quot;younger generation&amp;quot; about how &amp;quot;people think about computers and about computing in general&amp;quot;. As a member of the Will Wright generation of 12 year old Mac programmers who tried to take his games apart with ResEdit and tried to make our own, with Perl and HyperCard, this was really resonant, really true.&lt;p&gt;When SimEarth came out, I spent hours and hours just rereading the thick paper manual of how it all worked, because the only places I could play it on the disks were in the computer lab after school, or for an hour a day on the home computer.&lt;p&gt;He turned incredibly complex systems into games and games into systems, so that reading his game manuals made you think about the whole world.&lt;p&gt;One thing sad to me now, with the focus on GPT or Diffusion prompts, is how much kids are no longer thinking about the actual systems or logical rules they&amp;#x27;re playing with, and just learning to trick something that&amp;#x27;s already inscrutable and smarter than them. Mastering AI prompts or even running your own neural net doesn&amp;#x27;t teach anything like logic or the kind of deep, recursive cause and effect structure you could get from Will Wright&amp;#x27;s toys, or even from CK3... even if you get all your prompts perfect to make what you want, it teaches something much more like dependence on a magical oracle than, say, a toy&amp;#x2F;game&amp;#x2F;sim that really encourages you to deconstruct and take pleasure in all its interconnections that you can understand.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>emrah</author><text>&amp;gt; One thing sad to me now, with the focus on GPT or Diffusion prompts, is how much kids are no longer thinking about the actual systems or logical rules they&amp;#x27;re playing with, and just learning to trick something that&amp;#x27;s already inscrutable and smarter than them&lt;p&gt;This is something I don&amp;#x27;t understand. Sure, not every kid is going to think about that but that&amp;#x27;s ok. We need some kids to think about it, probably a small subset..&lt;p&gt;Back when computers were new, not every kid tried to make games or understand how they worked either. Only a small subset and that&amp;#x27;s how it is..</text></comment>

train

<story><title>How to write a JavaScript-free todo app using just HTML and CSS</title><url>http://www.mattzeunert.com/2017/10/30/javascript-free-todo-app.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>Scryptonite</author><text>I made something very similar for fun a few years ago[0] and added it to a repository called You-Dont-Need-JavaScript[1].&lt;p&gt;CSS-only for this sort if thing is totally contrived, but making it still proved to be a fun little exercise.&lt;p&gt;[0]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;codepen.io&amp;#x2F;scryptonite&amp;#x2F;pen&amp;#x2F;oLGzdj&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;codepen.io&amp;#x2F;scryptonite&amp;#x2F;pen&amp;#x2F;oLGzdj&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;[1]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;you-dont-need&amp;#x2F;You-Dont-Need-JavaScript&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;you-dont-need&amp;#x2F;You-Dont-Need-JavaScript&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

<story><title>How to write a JavaScript-free todo app using just HTML and CSS</title><url>http://www.mattzeunert.com/2017/10/30/javascript-free-todo-app.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jordache</author><text>These exercises will be a lot more fruitful to read through if the author can acknowledge the contrived nature of these attempts and provide a real-world advantageous use case of the techniques outlined</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Watch Netflix in Ubuntu today</title><url>https://insights.ubuntu.com/2014/10/10/watch-netflix-in-ubuntu-today/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>asadotzler</author><text>Why do these &amp;quot;Linux gets Netflix&amp;quot; stories not have the same bad attitude from folks as the &amp;quot;W3C caves to DRM&amp;quot; stories? They&amp;#x27;re the same topic, essentially.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>smacktoward</author><text>My guess would be that in the &amp;quot;Linux gets Netflix&amp;quot; story, the positive angle (&amp;quot;I get Netflix!&amp;quot;) is specific and concrete, while the negative (&amp;quot;More DRM, yuck&amp;quot;) is more abstract. Whereas in the &amp;quot;W3C caves to DRM&amp;quot; story, it&amp;#x27;s flipped; the negative is specific and concrete (&amp;quot;Standards body kowtows to corporate overlords&amp;quot;), while the positive (&amp;quot;maybe someday that will mean I can watch video on Linux&amp;quot;) is more abstract.</text></comment>

<story><title>Watch Netflix in Ubuntu today</title><url>https://insights.ubuntu.com/2014/10/10/watch-netflix-in-ubuntu-today/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>asadotzler</author><text>Why do these &amp;quot;Linux gets Netflix&amp;quot; stories not have the same bad attitude from folks as the &amp;quot;W3C caves to DRM&amp;quot; stories? They&amp;#x27;re the same topic, essentially.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>gph</author><text>I wasn&amp;#x27;t a vehement opponent of W3C implementing DRM, but I&amp;#x27;ll put my two cents in;&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;#x27;t mind if private companies implement DRM in their own products. I do mind DRM being standardized, meaning every vendor has to implement it in order to be complaint with the standard.&lt;p&gt;Ubuntu != linux, it is just a distro. Similarly Chrome is not the browser standard, it&amp;#x27;s only an implementation.&lt;p&gt;If this story was actually &amp;quot;Linux adds DRM to kernel for netflix and other media companies&amp;quot; I think you would see a huge reaction.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>An iframe from googlesyndication.com tries to access the camera and microphone</title><url>https://techsparx.com/software-development/security/csp-camera-microphone.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tomudding</author><text>I think this sounds more like some sort of fingerprinting attempt. It good to see that random access to these kind of resources fails due to new(er) browser controls. However, this does not mean that the fingerprinting actually failed.&lt;p&gt;There is probably some way to determine if the request was denied automatically by the browser or manually by the user (e.g., time to get &amp;quot;response&amp;quot;), which is definitely something which can be used for fingerprinting.&lt;p&gt;Which reminds me of fingerprinting by tiny differences in the audio API provided by browsers [0]. Super interesting, but also a bit depressing. Also works for things like canvases and WebGL.&lt;p&gt;EFF allows you to check how fingerprintable your browser is [1]. Do note that the results may not be very accurate.&lt;p&gt;[0]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;fingerprintjs.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;audio-fingerprinting&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;fingerprintjs.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;audio-fingerprinting&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;[1]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;coveryourtracks.eff.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;coveryourtracks.eff.org&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>adtehcmadness1</author><text>As someone working on exactly this type of stuff, your&amp;#x27;e absolutely right. \*.safeframe.googlesyndication.com is Google&amp;#x27;s implementation of the IAB&amp;#x27;s safeframe standard[0], which is basically a cross origin iframe with an API that&amp;#x27;s exposed to the embedded 3rd party code (the ad). This is how its HTML looks like (some attributes removed for readability):&lt;p&gt;&lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt; &amp;lt;iframe src=&amp;quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;\*.safeframe.googlesyndication.com&amp;#x2F;safeframe&amp;#x2F;1-0-38&amp;#x2F;html&amp;#x2F;container.html&amp;quot; title=&amp;quot;3rd party ad content&amp;quot; sandbox=&amp;quot;allow-forms allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation&amp;quot; allow=&amp;quot;attribution-reporting&amp;quot;&amp;gt;&amp;lt;&amp;#x2F;iframe&amp;gt; &lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt; As you can see, it has both sandbox[1] and allow[2] attributes. The former restricts certain behaviors of the embedded code (most notably, navigating the top window without user activation), and the latter restricts it from accessing certain APIs - this why the author saw errors in the console.&lt;p&gt;The script at &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;cdn.js7k.com&amp;#x2F;ix&amp;#x2F;talon-1.0.37.js&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;cdn.js7k.com&amp;#x2F;ix&amp;#x2F;talon-1.0.37.js&lt;/a&gt; is an ad verification library developed by Verizon Media (formerly Oath), and it does, among other things,, fingerprinting for bot detection purposes (because they want to prevent ad fraud). It was served together with the actual ad media (so called &amp;quot;creative&amp;quot;) into the safeframe.&lt;p&gt;This a relativity begin case. Iv&amp;#x27;e seen much more terrible stuff, from fingerprinting for user taking to straight out malware being served in ads. It&amp;#x27;s a wild west (or web).&lt;p&gt;[0]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.iab.com&amp;#x2F;guidelines&amp;#x2F;safeframe&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.iab.com&amp;#x2F;guidelines&amp;#x2F;safeframe&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;[1]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;developer.mozilla.org&amp;#x2F;en-US&amp;#x2F;docs&amp;#x2F;Web&amp;#x2F;HTML&amp;#x2F;Element&amp;#x2F;iframe#attr-sandbox&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;developer.mozilla.org&amp;#x2F;en-US&amp;#x2F;docs&amp;#x2F;Web&amp;#x2F;HTML&amp;#x2F;Element&amp;#x2F;if...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;[2]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;developer.mozilla.org&amp;#x2F;en-US&amp;#x2F;docs&amp;#x2F;Web&amp;#x2F;HTML&amp;#x2F;Element&amp;#x2F;iframe#attr-allow&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;developer.mozilla.org&amp;#x2F;en-US&amp;#x2F;docs&amp;#x2F;Web&amp;#x2F;HTML&amp;#x2F;Element&amp;#x2F;if...&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

<story><title>An iframe from googlesyndication.com tries to access the camera and microphone</title><url>https://techsparx.com/software-development/security/csp-camera-microphone.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tomudding</author><text>I think this sounds more like some sort of fingerprinting attempt. It good to see that random access to these kind of resources fails due to new(er) browser controls. However, this does not mean that the fingerprinting actually failed.&lt;p&gt;There is probably some way to determine if the request was denied automatically by the browser or manually by the user (e.g., time to get &amp;quot;response&amp;quot;), which is definitely something which can be used for fingerprinting.&lt;p&gt;Which reminds me of fingerprinting by tiny differences in the audio API provided by browsers [0]. Super interesting, but also a bit depressing. Also works for things like canvases and WebGL.&lt;p&gt;EFF allows you to check how fingerprintable your browser is [1]. Do note that the results may not be very accurate.&lt;p&gt;[0]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;fingerprintjs.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;audio-fingerprinting&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;fingerprintjs.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;audio-fingerprinting&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;[1]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;coveryourtracks.eff.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;coveryourtracks.eff.org&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dc3k</author><text>&amp;gt; &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;fingerprintjs.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;audio-fingerprinting&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;fingerprintjs.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;audio-fingerprinting&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; It is particularly useful to identify malicious visitors attempting to circumvent tracking&lt;p&gt;Ah yes, the visitor trying to not be tracked is the malicious one. Barf.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Members of Congress Demand Answers for the Unjust Domain Name Seizures</title><url>https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/members-congress-demand-answers-homeland-securitys-unjust-domain-name-seizures</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>DanielBMarkham</author><text>It used to be that if you wanted to corrupt your government so that you could gain a business advantage, it took a while. You met some politicians, you made some donations, you &quot;entertained&quot; folks. Legislation was introduced. It might take several tries before it was passed.&lt;p&gt;What I see now is that the system has granted itself so much &lt;i&gt;administrative&lt;/i&gt; discretion that you can use government as a direct agent in trying to kill your competitors. The threshold for getting the big stick of the government out and whacking your competition is so low that you&apos;re presented with multiple choices: go for their domain name. Find a violation of the thousands of various codes they must comply with. Use your patents to start a patent war. And so on.&lt;p&gt;The beauty of this way of doing things is that the more you either screw somebody else over or get screwed over, the more you end up doing all the corruption activity that you used to have to do on the front end -- but this time it&apos;s to be left alone. So in this case we have people pleading with their Congressmen to try to get the system to work correctly. We&apos;ve switched from corrupting a somewhat honest system for your own purposes to paying off a somewhat corrupt system in order to be left alone. Based on this, I predict political campaigns will continue to draw exponentially more money as things progress.&lt;p&gt;Interesting times to live in. We obviously need a secure, private, P2P domain name system.</text></comment>

<story><title>Members of Congress Demand Answers for the Unjust Domain Name Seizures</title><url>https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/members-congress-demand-answers-homeland-securitys-unjust-domain-name-seizures</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>antidoh</author><text>Article says the material was legal, and that the govt was delaying while it waited on the &lt;i&gt;RIAA&lt;/i&gt; to conclude its investigation.&lt;p&gt;A proper investigation &lt;i&gt;prior to seizure&lt;/i&gt; would have uncovered this, and a self-respecting prosecutor or investigator would not have gone forward with seizure after learning that there was no violation.&lt;p&gt;This is what due process is for, to prevent injustices resulting from vigilantism, whether by citizens or governments.&lt;p&gt;This kind of thing makes us look like a banana republic. How fortunate that we don&apos;t have to send troops outside the country to prop ourselves up; we&apos;re already here.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)</title><url>http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2015/04/16/les-deputes-approuvent-un-systeme-de-surveillance-du-trafic-sur-internet_4616652_4408996.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>gerty</author><text>French National Assembly has 577 delegates. According to Le Monde article, 25 voted for and 5 against. The rest, I suppose, didn&amp;#x27;t care to show up. This is beyond WTF.&lt;p&gt;I am a client at OVH and Gandi and I hope they send a big FU to the French government and relocate. I am willing to pay a premium for that.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dagw</author><text>&lt;i&gt;The rest, I suppose, didn&amp;#x27;t care to show up.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m assuming it&amp;#x27;s largely strategic. &amp;quot;Everybody&amp;quot; wanted to pass the bill, but no one wanted it on their voting record since they knew it was controversial. So everybody got together and selected a small number of martyrs to go sully themselves while everybody else could keep their hands clean.</text></comment>

<story><title>French National Assembly approved Internet traffic monitoring system (French)</title><url>http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2015/04/16/les-deputes-approuvent-un-systeme-de-surveillance-du-trafic-sur-internet_4616652_4408996.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>gerty</author><text>French National Assembly has 577 delegates. According to Le Monde article, 25 voted for and 5 against. The rest, I suppose, didn&amp;#x27;t care to show up. This is beyond WTF.&lt;p&gt;I am a client at OVH and Gandi and I hope they send a big FU to the French government and relocate. I am willing to pay a premium for that.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>zz1</author><text>They announced that they are going to relocate, indeed: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;eu.ovh.com&amp;#x2F;fr&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;articles&amp;#x2F;a1743.le-gouvernement-veut-il-contraindre-les-hebergeurs-internet-a-l-exil&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;eu.ovh.com&amp;#x2F;fr&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;articles&amp;#x2F;a1743.le-gouvernement-ve...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;And launched a big initiative to federate tech actors against the bill: &lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;ni-pigeons-ni-espions.fr&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;ni-pigeons-ni-espions.fr&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;######## Breaking ########&lt;p&gt;Octave Klaba finally declares that the bill doesn&amp;#x27;t compromise the trust chain. &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;olesovhcom&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;588666965755092993&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;olesovhcom&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;588666965755092993&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

train

<story><title>The Ladybird browser project</title><url>https://ladybird.dev/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>grey_earthling</author><text>&amp;gt; if it works in Chrome, all web developers will adopt it&lt;p&gt;This is why we, tech nerds who understand the problem, must resist monopolies: object to using such APIs. Chrome wouldn&amp;#x27;t be in quite this position if, instead of embracing the monopolist, more techies had warned their non-techy friends and family away from it, like they did with IE.</text></item><item><author>sph</author><text>It is not any easier, because we still have a monopoly running the show, only it&amp;#x27;s not called Microsoft anymore.&lt;p&gt;If anyone threatens Google position, they can literally throw money at the problem, invent some overcomplicated standard, implement it in Blink, and have the competition chase them. It doesn&amp;#x27;t need to go through W3C either, if it works in Chrome, all web developers will adopt it and any smaller engine will necessarily have to support it or risk losing whatever little market share they have left.&lt;p&gt;Having control of the internet now is of greater strategic importance than it was 20-30 years ago when Microsoft was king of the hill.</text></item><item><author>jug</author><text>It&amp;#x27;s been so inspiring to see him and his crew of hackers build a new, independent browser from scratch. I must admit I didn&amp;#x27;t think it was possible on this small scale in terms of man hours and funding.&lt;p&gt;However, the thought has also crossed my mind if we&amp;#x27;re finally seeing fruits of browsers being better standardized on &amp;quot;95%&amp;quot;+ of the popular features -- and if writing a browser today is in fact easier than both writing AND maintaining a browser a decade back. While the web is of course still evolving, it feels more &amp;quot;settled in&amp;quot; than 10-15 years ago.&lt;p&gt;There&amp;#x27;s also the factor that past developers didn&amp;#x27;t have the more complete roadmap set when they initially planned browser design, but now we have huge amounts of web standards already there AND also know how popular they got over time i.e. what to prioritize to support a modern web. One might superficially think there&amp;#x27;s simply more of everything, but I also think ideas that can be discarded. Just imagine that Internet Explorer had XSLT support, and FTP was common once upon a time!&lt;p&gt;It would be interesting to hear more about their own thoughts on these topics!&lt;p&gt;Edit: My bad; XSLT is still commonly supported and by all major browsers but a rarely used feature and stuck in limbo in XSLT 1.0. So it&amp;#x27;s probably among those things that can be safely omitted for quite some time.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>scblock</author><text>&amp;quot;Tech nerds&amp;quot; built web sites that only worked in IE back then and &amp;quot;tech nerds&amp;quot; are building websites now that only work in Chrome. Didn&amp;#x27;t have a clue back then, and don&amp;#x27;t have a clue now. Forget warning &amp;quot;non-techy&amp;quot; people and clean your own house first.</text></comment>

<story><title>The Ladybird browser project</title><url>https://ladybird.dev/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>grey_earthling</author><text>&amp;gt; if it works in Chrome, all web developers will adopt it&lt;p&gt;This is why we, tech nerds who understand the problem, must resist monopolies: object to using such APIs. Chrome wouldn&amp;#x27;t be in quite this position if, instead of embracing the monopolist, more techies had warned their non-techy friends and family away from it, like they did with IE.</text></item><item><author>sph</author><text>It is not any easier, because we still have a monopoly running the show, only it&amp;#x27;s not called Microsoft anymore.&lt;p&gt;If anyone threatens Google position, they can literally throw money at the problem, invent some overcomplicated standard, implement it in Blink, and have the competition chase them. It doesn&amp;#x27;t need to go through W3C either, if it works in Chrome, all web developers will adopt it and any smaller engine will necessarily have to support it or risk losing whatever little market share they have left.&lt;p&gt;Having control of the internet now is of greater strategic importance than it was 20-30 years ago when Microsoft was king of the hill.</text></item><item><author>jug</author><text>It&amp;#x27;s been so inspiring to see him and his crew of hackers build a new, independent browser from scratch. I must admit I didn&amp;#x27;t think it was possible on this small scale in terms of man hours and funding.&lt;p&gt;However, the thought has also crossed my mind if we&amp;#x27;re finally seeing fruits of browsers being better standardized on &amp;quot;95%&amp;quot;+ of the popular features -- and if writing a browser today is in fact easier than both writing AND maintaining a browser a decade back. While the web is of course still evolving, it feels more &amp;quot;settled in&amp;quot; than 10-15 years ago.&lt;p&gt;There&amp;#x27;s also the factor that past developers didn&amp;#x27;t have the more complete roadmap set when they initially planned browser design, but now we have huge amounts of web standards already there AND also know how popular they got over time i.e. what to prioritize to support a modern web. One might superficially think there&amp;#x27;s simply more of everything, but I also think ideas that can be discarded. Just imagine that Internet Explorer had XSLT support, and FTP was common once upon a time!&lt;p&gt;It would be interesting to hear more about their own thoughts on these topics!&lt;p&gt;Edit: My bad; XSLT is still commonly supported and by all major browsers but a rarely used feature and stuck in limbo in XSLT 1.0. So it&amp;#x27;s probably among those things that can be safely omitted for quite some time.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>razakel</author><text>We warned people that the government was snooping on everything you transmitted or received.&lt;p&gt;They didn&amp;#x27;t listen or care.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Migrating from RethinkDB to Postgres – An Experience Report</title><url>https://medium.com/fuzzy-sharp/migrating-to-postgres-2dc1519a6dc7</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>firasd</author><text>Sorry, I&amp;#x27;m just not buying that it&amp;#x27;s about the file size of data.&lt;p&gt;Right now I&amp;#x27;m working on an app that works with tweets. I want to find all tweets that link to iTunes.&lt;p&gt;When I was using:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; select * from `tweets` where `url` not like &amp;#x27;%twitter.com%&amp;#x27; and `url` like &amp;#x27;%itunes.apple.com%&amp;#x27;&lt;p&gt;I could scale my server up to 16 CPUs, it would still take several minutes to search a few million tweets.&lt;p&gt;Yesterday I added another field to the database, `is_audio_url` where I pre-compute whether the URL is an itunes link (by string matching in the app code) when I insert the record into the database. So I can do:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; select * from `tweets` where `is_audio_url` = 1&lt;p&gt;And now it&amp;#x27;s blazing fast. It is just my most recent of many experiences that MySQL really struggles with text matching.</text></item><item><author>qaq</author><text>I can assure you that Pinterest&amp;#x27;s dataset is vastly bigger than 100GB :) at certain scale RDBMS will obviously experience issues and might no longer be the optimal solution. For PG (hard to generalize) but beyond 10-20TB things become painful. Now the thing is that &amp;quot;limit&amp;quot; is constantly shifting so if you are starting with 100GB datasets and it is growing at 200GB a year you can basically stay on single instance RDBMS forever.</text></item><item><author>firasd</author><text>Do you have FULLTEXT indexes on those rows? I find it hard to believe that searching something like e.g. a fragment of text in Youtube comments can be as fast in a SQL system (even in RAM) as in Elasticsearch.&lt;p&gt;As for the other stuff I mentioned (recommendations, etc.) I&amp;#x27;m not just basing it on my personal experience--here&amp;#x27;s a write-up from Pinterest about having to dump all their MySQL data to Hadoop to drive various types of analysis. I doubt they would do it it if just putting the SQL DBs in RAM was adequate! &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;medium.com&amp;#x2F;@Pinterest_Engineering&amp;#x2F;tracker-ingesting-mysql-data-at-scale-part-1-424cf43fa7c3&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;medium.com&amp;#x2F;@Pinterest_Engineering&amp;#x2F;tracker-ingesting-...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>qaq</author><text>We do exactly what you describe on about 80TB dataset stored across a number of PG instances. The 100GB comments are extremely clever because running a query against a dataset that fully fits in RAM will be blazingly fast. &amp;quot;Try doing text search on a few million SQL rows&amp;quot; we are doing it on billions of rows.</text></item><item><author>firasd</author><text>Interesting quote: &amp;quot;we decided to compute all statistics on demand. This was something we previously tried in RethinkDB, but the results were not good... When we tried implementing statistics as SQL queries in Postgres, we were amazed by the performance. We could implement complex statistics involving data from many tables.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;I think standard line &amp;quot;use right tool for the job&amp;quot; is still the ultimate answer. Data in most applications is relational, and you need to query it in different ways that weren&amp;#x27;t anticipated at the beginning, hence the longevity of SQL.&lt;p&gt;That said, I too often see HN commentators say something like &amp;quot;this data was only 100 GB? Why didn&amp;#x27;t they just put it in Postgres?&amp;quot; which is not as clever as the writer may think. Try doing text search on a few million SQL rows, or generating product recommendations, or finding trending topics... Elasticsearch and other &amp;#x27;big data&amp;#x27; tools will do it much quicker than SQL because its a different category of problem. It&amp;#x27;s not about the data size, it&amp;#x27;s about the type of processing required. (Edited my last line here a bit based on replies below.)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Lazare</author><text>Full text search in Postgres is fast if you have it configured correctly.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; It is just my most recent of many experiences that MySQL&lt;p&gt;1) You&amp;#x27;re using MySQL not Postgres; given that this is a discussion about whether Postgres can compete with Elasticsearch, that&amp;#x27;s not super relevant. :)&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; select * from `tweets` where `url` not like &amp;#x27;%twitter.com%&amp;#x27; and `url` like &amp;#x27;%itunes.apple.com%&amp;#x27;&lt;p&gt;2) That&amp;#x27;s not how you query a full text index; that&amp;#x27;s going to be glacially slow.&lt;p&gt;You need a FULLTEXT index and to use a MATCH...AGAINST query. Check out the docs[1].&lt;p&gt;[1]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;dev.mysql.com&amp;#x2F;doc&amp;#x2F;refman&amp;#x2F;5.7&amp;#x2F;en&amp;#x2F;fulltext-search.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;dev.mysql.com&amp;#x2F;doc&amp;#x2F;refman&amp;#x2F;5.7&amp;#x2F;en&amp;#x2F;fulltext-search.html&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

<story><title>Migrating from RethinkDB to Postgres – An Experience Report</title><url>https://medium.com/fuzzy-sharp/migrating-to-postgres-2dc1519a6dc7</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>firasd</author><text>Sorry, I&amp;#x27;m just not buying that it&amp;#x27;s about the file size of data.&lt;p&gt;Right now I&amp;#x27;m working on an app that works with tweets. I want to find all tweets that link to iTunes.&lt;p&gt;When I was using:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; select * from `tweets` where `url` not like &amp;#x27;%twitter.com%&amp;#x27; and `url` like &amp;#x27;%itunes.apple.com%&amp;#x27;&lt;p&gt;I could scale my server up to 16 CPUs, it would still take several minutes to search a few million tweets.&lt;p&gt;Yesterday I added another field to the database, `is_audio_url` where I pre-compute whether the URL is an itunes link (by string matching in the app code) when I insert the record into the database. So I can do:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; select * from `tweets` where `is_audio_url` = 1&lt;p&gt;And now it&amp;#x27;s blazing fast. It is just my most recent of many experiences that MySQL really struggles with text matching.</text></item><item><author>qaq</author><text>I can assure you that Pinterest&amp;#x27;s dataset is vastly bigger than 100GB :) at certain scale RDBMS will obviously experience issues and might no longer be the optimal solution. For PG (hard to generalize) but beyond 10-20TB things become painful. Now the thing is that &amp;quot;limit&amp;quot; is constantly shifting so if you are starting with 100GB datasets and it is growing at 200GB a year you can basically stay on single instance RDBMS forever.</text></item><item><author>firasd</author><text>Do you have FULLTEXT indexes on those rows? I find it hard to believe that searching something like e.g. a fragment of text in Youtube comments can be as fast in a SQL system (even in RAM) as in Elasticsearch.&lt;p&gt;As for the other stuff I mentioned (recommendations, etc.) I&amp;#x27;m not just basing it on my personal experience--here&amp;#x27;s a write-up from Pinterest about having to dump all their MySQL data to Hadoop to drive various types of analysis. I doubt they would do it it if just putting the SQL DBs in RAM was adequate! &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;medium.com&amp;#x2F;@Pinterest_Engineering&amp;#x2F;tracker-ingesting-mysql-data-at-scale-part-1-424cf43fa7c3&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;medium.com&amp;#x2F;@Pinterest_Engineering&amp;#x2F;tracker-ingesting-...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>qaq</author><text>We do exactly what you describe on about 80TB dataset stored across a number of PG instances. The 100GB comments are extremely clever because running a query against a dataset that fully fits in RAM will be blazingly fast. &amp;quot;Try doing text search on a few million SQL rows&amp;quot; we are doing it on billions of rows.</text></item><item><author>firasd</author><text>Interesting quote: &amp;quot;we decided to compute all statistics on demand. This was something we previously tried in RethinkDB, but the results were not good... When we tried implementing statistics as SQL queries in Postgres, we were amazed by the performance. We could implement complex statistics involving data from many tables.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;I think standard line &amp;quot;use right tool for the job&amp;quot; is still the ultimate answer. Data in most applications is relational, and you need to query it in different ways that weren&amp;#x27;t anticipated at the beginning, hence the longevity of SQL.&lt;p&gt;That said, I too often see HN commentators say something like &amp;quot;this data was only 100 GB? Why didn&amp;#x27;t they just put it in Postgres?&amp;quot; which is not as clever as the writer may think. Try doing text search on a few million SQL rows, or generating product recommendations, or finding trending topics... Elasticsearch and other &amp;#x27;big data&amp;#x27; tools will do it much quicker than SQL because its a different category of problem. It&amp;#x27;s not about the data size, it&amp;#x27;s about the type of processing required. (Edited my last line here a bit based on replies below.)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>qaq</author><text>I am not selling anything to you :) You can scale your server to even 100 vCpu or whatever blackbox name the provider is using and still have same speed mainly because MySQL does not have parallel query :). BTW you none ever mentioned MySQL but you keep brining it up.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>U.S. To Collect Social Media Data on All Immigrants Entering Country</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/28/us/politics/immigrants-social-media-trump.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>knz</author><text>As a permanent resident with a pending citizenship application (who came on the visa mentioned at the end of this article), I find this incredibly alarming.&lt;p&gt;I have nothing to hide, despise terrorism and the fanatics that commit it, and wish no harm on others with different social, political, or religious views. But I&amp;#x27;m familiar enough with history to know how badly this can end. &amp;quot;Papers please&amp;quot; had consequences, especially for groups targeted for political reasons.&lt;p&gt;Just last night I was browsing Wikipedia articles on various Presidential&amp;#x2F;political assassinations after watching an episode of the PBS Vietnam War documentary that is currently being aired. Earlier this week I tried to sign up for Snapchat and discovered an active account based out of Saudi Arabia that someone had set up using my email address (via an unverified email address I assume - thanks SnapChat). I can&amp;#x27;t read arabic so have no idea what was being shared on that platform from &amp;quot;my&amp;quot; account but based upon the images it looked critical of America.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s not much of a leap to imagine being accused of various things based upon your browsing history or social media, especially if actions like this (&lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.npr.org&amp;#x2F;sections&amp;#x2F;thetwo-way&amp;#x2F;2017&amp;#x2F;08&amp;#x2F;15&amp;#x2F;543782396&amp;#x2F;doj-demands-files-on-anti-trump-activists-and-a-web-hosting-company-resists&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.npr.org&amp;#x2F;sections&amp;#x2F;thetwo-way&amp;#x2F;2017&amp;#x2F;08&amp;#x2F;15&amp;#x2F;543782396&amp;#x2F;...&lt;/a&gt;) become more common.&lt;p&gt;The rational part of my brain keeps screaming &amp;quot;This is America, it can&amp;#x27;t happen here, especially if you have nothing to hide&amp;quot; but I also find it difficult to ignore the historical and current warning signs.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>snarf21</author><text>This is scary and keeps getting worse. As a citizen, I&amp;#x27;m even worried about traveling and coming back. Do I want my phone confiscated because a friend from high school tagged me in a political post a random border patrol agent disagrees with? or worse?&lt;p&gt;Remember, they have not stopped any terrorist attacks in the US with all the new surveillance since 9&amp;#x2F;11 (to my knowledge).&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.&amp;quot; -Ben Franklin</text></comment>

<story><title>U.S. To Collect Social Media Data on All Immigrants Entering Country</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/28/us/politics/immigrants-social-media-trump.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>knz</author><text>As a permanent resident with a pending citizenship application (who came on the visa mentioned at the end of this article), I find this incredibly alarming.&lt;p&gt;I have nothing to hide, despise terrorism and the fanatics that commit it, and wish no harm on others with different social, political, or religious views. But I&amp;#x27;m familiar enough with history to know how badly this can end. &amp;quot;Papers please&amp;quot; had consequences, especially for groups targeted for political reasons.&lt;p&gt;Just last night I was browsing Wikipedia articles on various Presidential&amp;#x2F;political assassinations after watching an episode of the PBS Vietnam War documentary that is currently being aired. Earlier this week I tried to sign up for Snapchat and discovered an active account based out of Saudi Arabia that someone had set up using my email address (via an unverified email address I assume - thanks SnapChat). I can&amp;#x27;t read arabic so have no idea what was being shared on that platform from &amp;quot;my&amp;quot; account but based upon the images it looked critical of America.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s not much of a leap to imagine being accused of various things based upon your browsing history or social media, especially if actions like this (&lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.npr.org&amp;#x2F;sections&amp;#x2F;thetwo-way&amp;#x2F;2017&amp;#x2F;08&amp;#x2F;15&amp;#x2F;543782396&amp;#x2F;doj-demands-files-on-anti-trump-activists-and-a-web-hosting-company-resists&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.npr.org&amp;#x2F;sections&amp;#x2F;thetwo-way&amp;#x2F;2017&amp;#x2F;08&amp;#x2F;15&amp;#x2F;543782396&amp;#x2F;...&lt;/a&gt;) become more common.&lt;p&gt;The rational part of my brain keeps screaming &amp;quot;This is America, it can&amp;#x27;t happen here, especially if you have nothing to hide&amp;quot; but I also find it difficult to ignore the historical and current warning signs.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>philk10</author><text>Same - resident alien going for citizenship next year. Active on Twitter and FB with plenty of political posts. Really looking forward to sending in my application next year....</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Purge site data when site identified via old tracking cookies</title><url>https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1599262</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>JMTQp8lwXL</author><text>I wouldn&amp;#x27;t mind going back to a JavaScript-less web experience. I know not all tracking is based on JS, but the browser provides so many heuristics this way: screen size, cursor location, installed plugins. Give me reasonably formatted HTML, and something a little bit more powerful than curl.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>JohnFen</author><text>&amp;gt; I wouldn&amp;#x27;t mind going back to a JavaScript-less web experience.&lt;p&gt;My default policy is to not allow JS to run, so my experience is already mostly Javascriptless. And, I have to say, my user experience on most web sites is actually better when I don&amp;#x27;t allow Javascript to execute.</text></comment>

<story><title>Purge site data when site identified via old tracking cookies</title><url>https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1599262</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>JMTQp8lwXL</author><text>I wouldn&amp;#x27;t mind going back to a JavaScript-less web experience. I know not all tracking is based on JS, but the browser provides so many heuristics this way: screen size, cursor location, installed plugins. Give me reasonably formatted HTML, and something a little bit more powerful than curl.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>reificator</author><text>If &amp;quot;reasonably formatted&amp;quot; means CSS comes along for the ride, prepare for tracking pixels behind onhover rules, and on and on we go...</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Thoughts about Twitter</title><url>https://nolancaudill.com/2022/11/04/thoughts-about-twitter/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>mjr00</author><text>&amp;gt; But, what is gone? Twitter was a unique spot where journalists, celebrities, titans of industries, your family, friends and co-workers, would join a daily mosh pit filled with a mix of truly important cultural moments and the most inane things you’ve ever seen. [...] Twitter will likely go from Elon’s new toy that is too difficult for him to play with, to being passed on to his legal and finance advisers to sort out.&lt;p&gt;Regardless of your opinion on Elon, it&amp;#x27;s simply too early to conclude that this is &amp;quot;likely&amp;quot; to happen, or that all those people will stop using it.&lt;p&gt;For those old enough to remember, major social media platform changes have happened and users have sworn that it was (effectively) the end. Sometimes they are right: see new Digg causing a mass Reddit migration, or banning adult content on Tumblr, turning a dying platform into a dead one. Sometimes they are incredibly wrong: see new Reddit[0], or, amusingly, people who claimed that Facebook switching to an algorithmic news feed instead of chronological was the end of the platform. I can&amp;#x27;t remember how long ago that was, but I imagine Facebook has increased in userbase and value 3 or 4 orders of magnitudes since that change.&lt;p&gt;[0] Yes, I&amp;#x27;m aware old reddit is still accessible, but the vast majority of the userbase is on the mobile website or app.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>matwood</author><text>&amp;gt; Regardless of your opinion on Elon, it&amp;#x27;s simply too early to conclude that this is &amp;quot;likely&amp;quot; to happen, or that all those people will stop using it.&lt;p&gt;Agree. Twitter was a going nowhere dumpster fire &lt;i&gt;before&lt;/i&gt; the purchase. It&amp;#x27;s going to be a bumpy ride, but it could end up better or disappear. Either would be fine with me.&lt;p&gt;Everyone on this site (and even many non-tech people) had their own ideas on how to fix Twitter. It was a given that it was a mess. Musk had the money and hubris (I don&amp;#x27;t think he wanted to really buy it), to actually say hold my beer.&lt;p&gt;Regardless of what you think of Musk, he loves Twitter and now has a lot of financial incentive to make it function better as a business. So we&amp;#x27;ll see.</text></comment>

<story><title>Thoughts about Twitter</title><url>https://nolancaudill.com/2022/11/04/thoughts-about-twitter/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>mjr00</author><text>&amp;gt; But, what is gone? Twitter was a unique spot where journalists, celebrities, titans of industries, your family, friends and co-workers, would join a daily mosh pit filled with a mix of truly important cultural moments and the most inane things you’ve ever seen. [...] Twitter will likely go from Elon’s new toy that is too difficult for him to play with, to being passed on to his legal and finance advisers to sort out.&lt;p&gt;Regardless of your opinion on Elon, it&amp;#x27;s simply too early to conclude that this is &amp;quot;likely&amp;quot; to happen, or that all those people will stop using it.&lt;p&gt;For those old enough to remember, major social media platform changes have happened and users have sworn that it was (effectively) the end. Sometimes they are right: see new Digg causing a mass Reddit migration, or banning adult content on Tumblr, turning a dying platform into a dead one. Sometimes they are incredibly wrong: see new Reddit[0], or, amusingly, people who claimed that Facebook switching to an algorithmic news feed instead of chronological was the end of the platform. I can&amp;#x27;t remember how long ago that was, but I imagine Facebook has increased in userbase and value 3 or 4 orders of magnitudes since that change.&lt;p&gt;[0] Yes, I&amp;#x27;m aware old reddit is still accessible, but the vast majority of the userbase is on the mobile website or app.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>vineyardmike</author><text>It’s too early to claim it’s dead but he’s right that it’s a coin toss to see if the service can stay running (without downtime). With 50% layoffs (and the rumors of how lax their security was) it’s only a matter of time before the on-call needed to save some issue won’t exist. A breach or bug or something is inevitable. Remember when meta -a far bigger and richer company- messed up basic networking and took the company down for a day?&lt;p&gt;Regardless of how you feel about free speech, not everyone likes it. Even the perception that twitter is getting toxic will drive people away… except the toxic people. The only thing holding twitter up is that there’s no alternative for the people that matter - the “blue checks” who drive most of their traffic and engagement. Yet Elon managed to piss them off anyways.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>ProtonMail includes Google Recaptcha for login</title><url>https://github.com/ProtonMail/WebClient/issues/242</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>protonmail</author><text>A few comments about this.&lt;p&gt;A very small fraction of logins get the CAPTCHA challenge. We, and other services, face unrelenting brute force attacks on our login endpoints. If you are seeing a CAPTCHA on login, chances are that something about your connection is suspicious to our system. It&amp;#x27;s far from perfect, and we continue to improve it, but at most a percent or two of users are seeing CAPTCHA at any time.&lt;p&gt;The CAPTCHA is run in an iframe on a separate domain to sandbox it from the Proton login flow prevent it from compromising the webapp. Obviously Google still gets some information, but we do all we can to limit this.&lt;p&gt;CAPTCHAs are very hard to build, especially considering Google has a habit of clearing the field with it&amp;#x27;s own captcha-breaking code. Most companies do not have the resources to build their own. We had an alternative CAPTCHA we were going to use as a replacement a few years ago and then the company behind it went bankrupt. We are currently looking to replace ReCAPTCHA with hcaptcha, which should alleviate some of these problems.&lt;p&gt;We have other strategies which we are also exploring to try to reduce the need for CAPTCHAs entirely, but these are also not trivial to build and integrate into all clients.&lt;p&gt;TL;DR It&amp;#x27;s a small fraction of users who are affected, it&amp;#x27;s necessary to protect our users from brute force login attacks, we don&amp;#x27;t like it either and are working hard on replacements.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>neilv</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m going to put you on a spot a bit, because this seems important to ProtonMail&amp;#x27;s viability, and I want you to keep succeeding...&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;i&gt;Obviously Google still gets some information, but we do all we can to limit this.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;When you cause a request to be made for ReCaptcha, it seems that you&amp;#x27;re leaking enough information to (in many cases) link a possibly-pseudonymous Protonmail account to an identifiable individual.&lt;p&gt;(For example, even if you leak nothing else than &lt;i&gt;times&lt;/i&gt; that individuals identifiable by Google logged into &lt;i&gt;unidentified&lt;/i&gt; ProtonMail accounts, Google can already see various external activity of specific ProtonMail accounts, and you&amp;#x27;ve given them temporal correlations between activity of pseudonymous accounts and logins by identifiable individuals. That&amp;#x27;s not the only example, but even that alone seems a significant risk.)&lt;p&gt;And it&amp;#x27;s seems to be a real risk: Google is in the business of doing things like that, has a track record of doing things like that, and presumably is more than capable enough of doing it some more.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;i&gt;but at most a percent or two of users are seeing CAPTCHA at any time.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;That sounds like a lot. And the &amp;quot;at any time&amp;quot; sounds like an even higher percentage of users are potentially being compromised by the use of ReCaptcha.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;i&gt;we don&amp;#x27;t like it either&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m not yet convinced that this is the least of all evils. And I don&amp;#x27;t know how much you have to dislike it before you decide not to do it.&lt;p&gt;For persuasive effect, is it helpful to imagine the reaction of your philosophical adversaries, when they heard that ProtonMail was using ReCaptcha? I just imagined some of them laughing derisively or incredulously. I don&amp;#x27;t say that to be mean, but I don&amp;#x27;t understand the rationale for using ReCaptcha, and I want to emphasize that it seems to be a problem that threatens ProtonMail&amp;#x27;s raison d&amp;#x27;etre and&amp;#x2F;or brand image.&lt;p&gt;(BTW, I&amp;#x27;m assuming this ReCaptcha choice &lt;i&gt;isn&amp;#x27;t&lt;/i&gt; due to legally-compelled cooperation in unmasking specific accounts -- in which case I wouldn&amp;#x27;t say anything -- since, in that case, I expect you&amp;#x27;d find a way to comply without misrepresenting the rationale to everyone else. I&amp;#x27;ve seen ProtonMail thinking ahead to avoid related conflicting obligations and assurances.)&lt;p&gt;(BTW, I&amp;#x27;m speaking here of Google as an adversary of your customers, and therefore of you, only because that seems to be how your product is positioned, and why you have customers at all, rather than everyone just using GMail. I&amp;#x27;m not saying that Google is bad; only that I think it should be considered an adversary from your perspective.)</text></comment>

<story><title>ProtonMail includes Google Recaptcha for login</title><url>https://github.com/ProtonMail/WebClient/issues/242</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>protonmail</author><text>A few comments about this.&lt;p&gt;A very small fraction of logins get the CAPTCHA challenge. We, and other services, face unrelenting brute force attacks on our login endpoints. If you are seeing a CAPTCHA on login, chances are that something about your connection is suspicious to our system. It&amp;#x27;s far from perfect, and we continue to improve it, but at most a percent or two of users are seeing CAPTCHA at any time.&lt;p&gt;The CAPTCHA is run in an iframe on a separate domain to sandbox it from the Proton login flow prevent it from compromising the webapp. Obviously Google still gets some information, but we do all we can to limit this.&lt;p&gt;CAPTCHAs are very hard to build, especially considering Google has a habit of clearing the field with it&amp;#x27;s own captcha-breaking code. Most companies do not have the resources to build their own. We had an alternative CAPTCHA we were going to use as a replacement a few years ago and then the company behind it went bankrupt. We are currently looking to replace ReCAPTCHA with hcaptcha, which should alleviate some of these problems.&lt;p&gt;We have other strategies which we are also exploring to try to reduce the need for CAPTCHAs entirely, but these are also not trivial to build and integrate into all clients.&lt;p&gt;TL;DR It&amp;#x27;s a small fraction of users who are affected, it&amp;#x27;s necessary to protect our users from brute force login attacks, we don&amp;#x27;t like it either and are working hard on replacements.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jjav</author><text>A captcha of any kind on a paid service (or a storefront where I&amp;#x27;m looking to pay money) is an absolute deal breaker for me. I will not be clicking on lights and stopsigns to be able to pay money.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>16-year-old British girl earns £48,000 helping Chinese people name their babies</title><url>http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/37255033/a-16-year-old-british-girl-earns-48000-helping-chinese-people-name-their-babies</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tvanantwerp</author><text>My wife is Chinese and has told me many of the ridiculous English names people have. We&amp;#x27;ve heard Cinderella before. My favorite that we&amp;#x27;ve encountered was a young woman named Pancake.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s not just a problem of limited access to information, but also limited knowledge of what qualifies as a good English name. All of the people we&amp;#x27;ve encountered were from Hong Kong, which has no Great Firewall to contend with. We&amp;#x27;ve also seen many people using names that haven&amp;#x27;t been popular in the West in a long time, like Eugene or Doris.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dilemma</author><text>I have friends named Dolphin, Fish and Shadow and they know perfectly well that their names are funny. I&amp;#x27;m certain that Pancake does too. Having an English name is a bit unreal for them just as it would be for you and me getting a Chinese name, so why not get a funny one?&lt;p&gt;Also, naming in another language is difficult. Microsoft knows that, as &amp;quot;Bing&amp;quot; means disease in mandarin.</text></comment>

<story><title>16-year-old British girl earns £48,000 helping Chinese people name their babies</title><url>http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/37255033/a-16-year-old-british-girl-earns-48000-helping-chinese-people-name-their-babies</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tvanantwerp</author><text>My wife is Chinese and has told me many of the ridiculous English names people have. We&amp;#x27;ve heard Cinderella before. My favorite that we&amp;#x27;ve encountered was a young woman named Pancake.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s not just a problem of limited access to information, but also limited knowledge of what qualifies as a good English name. All of the people we&amp;#x27;ve encountered were from Hong Kong, which has no Great Firewall to contend with. We&amp;#x27;ve also seen many people using names that haven&amp;#x27;t been popular in the West in a long time, like Eugene or Doris.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>cafard</author><text>I guess that one could regard that as the counterpart to the odd Hanzi tattoos Americans get without having the slightest idea of whether they are done right.&lt;p&gt;And plenty of Americans choose odd names for their children--out of TV shows, movies, comic strips.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Bill seeks to put porn block on computers sold in SC</title><url>http://www.goupstate.com/news/20161217/bill-seeks-to-put-porn-block-on-computers-sold-in-sc</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dTal</author><text>The mindset that would even produce such an idea is incredibly dangerous. A computer-naive person might think that requiring that all computers be sold with specific software installed is no more burdensome that requiring that all cars be sold with safety belts. But we all know that making the infrastructure to actually enforce such a rule would lead us to Stallman&amp;#x27;s worst dystopian nightmare: a Central Authority that somehow dictates what must, and what cannot, run on your computer.&lt;p&gt;There&amp;#x27;s still a real danger that something like this will come to pass, especially when all the popular OSs come from centralised vendors upon whom pressure can be applied.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>speeder</author><text>In Brazil the dystopia is reality:&lt;p&gt;1. The law requires certain amount of Brazillian made bloatware stuff to be shipped with all phones. &amp;quot;Coincidentally&amp;quot; the software never ends being actually useful stuff, and is always the work of some company owned by a politician or by the friends and family of a politician.&lt;p&gt;2. To sell games in Brazil (physical board games and rpg books included) you must submit paperwork (of the dead tree kind) to the Ministry of Justice asking permission and asking for age rating. The government argues it is not censorship, only regulation, but it CAN legally refuse giving an age rating, de facto banning the game.&lt;p&gt;3. Possession, storage or even giving away games also fall in the previous point. It don&amp;#x27;t happened yet, but theoretically anyone can get up to two years in jail for owning a game that isn&amp;#x27;t rated by the Ministry of Justice.&lt;p&gt;4. Because of points 2 and 3, Brazil for many years didn&amp;#x27;t had the games categories in mobile stores (iTunes for example) and still to this day have less content than other countries in digital games platforms (Steam, Xbox Live, PSN...)&lt;p&gt;5. Brazil constitution banned censorship, and has freedom of expression explicitly protected, yet Brazil has more games judicially banned than China, usually on &amp;quot;morality&amp;quot; grounds, for example EverQuest was banned because it allowed players to do evil quests.</text></comment>

<story><title>Bill seeks to put porn block on computers sold in SC</title><url>http://www.goupstate.com/news/20161217/bill-seeks-to-put-porn-block-on-computers-sold-in-sc</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dTal</author><text>The mindset that would even produce such an idea is incredibly dangerous. A computer-naive person might think that requiring that all computers be sold with specific software installed is no more burdensome that requiring that all cars be sold with safety belts. But we all know that making the infrastructure to actually enforce such a rule would lead us to Stallman&amp;#x27;s worst dystopian nightmare: a Central Authority that somehow dictates what must, and what cannot, run on your computer.&lt;p&gt;There&amp;#x27;s still a real danger that something like this will come to pass, especially when all the popular OSs come from centralised vendors upon whom pressure can be applied.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Fuxy</author><text>Sigh.. I wish legislators would stop telling us what kind of porn we are or aren&amp;#x27;t allowed to watch.&lt;p&gt;For one thing default porn filter installed on all laptops doesn&amp;#x27;t make any kind of sense given most of the population is over 18.&lt;p&gt;Opt in makes a lot more sense than opt out in this case.&lt;p&gt;Plus the fact that they are asking for money from the manufacturer and the customer to opt out makes it look like just another scheme to make money under the theme &amp;quot;it&amp;#x27;s for the children&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;Honestly I&amp;#x27;m calling BS on this. It&amp;#x27;s just some greedy politicians trying to squeeze money out of people for stupid reasons.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Why winners become cheaters</title><url>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/08/why-winners-become-cheaters/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>unabst</author><text>Armstrong was a true champion. It&amp;#x27;s the public that wasn&amp;#x27;t made aware of what the real game was. All the cyclists knew it as did the organization and everyone professionally close to pro cycling. It was a doping game. And out of all that doped, Armstrong won 7 years in a row. He was a true champion.&lt;p&gt;The more accurate statement here is &amp;quot;cheaters become winners&amp;quot; and not the other way around. Cheating implies rules, and most rules are stupid, especially in sports. Doping of course changes the &amp;quot;sport&amp;quot; in many ways, and is illegal for good reason, but in a true competition of life and death, of success and failure, of rags to riches, of maintaining a family legacy, or of simply &amp;quot;winning&amp;quot; in today&amp;#x27;s &amp;quot;winner&amp;#x27;s society&amp;quot;, the upside of cheating easily surpasses the downside. And for those who figure out how to cheat, it becomes easy, and part of the game. Then as they see everyone else cheat, the moral and ethical burden is easily nullified.&lt;p&gt;Rules in society are also pretty stupid. Drug dealers know this. Wall Street for sure knows this. And the smartest people who win, most often than not, do so by cheating, because it&amp;#x27;s all just a game. And it&amp;#x27;s okay to cheat in a game as long as you don&amp;#x27;t get caught. &amp;quot;Play dirty&amp;quot; is the western mantra that embodies this sentiment nicely, and it&amp;#x27;s a positive sentiment. It&amp;#x27;s antiestablishmentarianism, it&amp;#x27;s rock n&amp;#x27; roll, it&amp;#x27;s Bruce Willis in Die Hard.&lt;p&gt;Regardless of what anyone thinks of Lance Armstrong, you have to hand it to the guy. He certainly made the most out of his cheating win streak through one of the greatest charities of all time. Cheating in sports is one thing. His true legacy was doing whatever he could to help others cheat death as he did.&lt;p&gt;Devils don&amp;#x27;t save lives (people do).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>the-dude</author><text>Spot on. I have heard it explained like this ( by Smeets, a Dutch reporter, whom I dislike ) :&lt;p&gt;My recollection:&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;The riders define &amp;#x27;doping&amp;#x27; as going over the limit of detection. They all use &amp;#x27;forbidden&amp;#x27; substances but below the limits. That is why they can say with a straight face on TV they are &amp;#x27;absolutely clean&amp;#x27;. And two weeks later be caught because of a dosing mistake.&amp;quot;</text></comment>

<story><title>Why winners become cheaters</title><url>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/08/why-winners-become-cheaters/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>unabst</author><text>Armstrong was a true champion. It&amp;#x27;s the public that wasn&amp;#x27;t made aware of what the real game was. All the cyclists knew it as did the organization and everyone professionally close to pro cycling. It was a doping game. And out of all that doped, Armstrong won 7 years in a row. He was a true champion.&lt;p&gt;The more accurate statement here is &amp;quot;cheaters become winners&amp;quot; and not the other way around. Cheating implies rules, and most rules are stupid, especially in sports. Doping of course changes the &amp;quot;sport&amp;quot; in many ways, and is illegal for good reason, but in a true competition of life and death, of success and failure, of rags to riches, of maintaining a family legacy, or of simply &amp;quot;winning&amp;quot; in today&amp;#x27;s &amp;quot;winner&amp;#x27;s society&amp;quot;, the upside of cheating easily surpasses the downside. And for those who figure out how to cheat, it becomes easy, and part of the game. Then as they see everyone else cheat, the moral and ethical burden is easily nullified.&lt;p&gt;Rules in society are also pretty stupid. Drug dealers know this. Wall Street for sure knows this. And the smartest people who win, most often than not, do so by cheating, because it&amp;#x27;s all just a game. And it&amp;#x27;s okay to cheat in a game as long as you don&amp;#x27;t get caught. &amp;quot;Play dirty&amp;quot; is the western mantra that embodies this sentiment nicely, and it&amp;#x27;s a positive sentiment. It&amp;#x27;s antiestablishmentarianism, it&amp;#x27;s rock n&amp;#x27; roll, it&amp;#x27;s Bruce Willis in Die Hard.&lt;p&gt;Regardless of what anyone thinks of Lance Armstrong, you have to hand it to the guy. He certainly made the most out of his cheating win streak through one of the greatest charities of all time. Cheating in sports is one thing. His true legacy was doing whatever he could to help others cheat death as he did.&lt;p&gt;Devils don&amp;#x27;t save lives (people do).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>softyeti</author><text>On one hand, yes, I think you can say that to be a winner, you had to dope. But if you took all of the dopers out, we would still have a winner.&lt;p&gt;Consider Cadel Evans. In my opinion, I don&amp;#x27;t think he doped. He was always in the conversation with Vinokourav, Ullrich, and the other top guys. For years.&lt;p&gt;He eventually won, but the sport was much cleaner by then.&lt;p&gt;I was a huge Armstrong fan. When I heard that Hincapie admitted to doping, I knew it was over. Over because Hincapie was always Lance&amp;#x27;s right-hand man, and also over because Armstrong wouldn&amp;#x27;t go after Hincapie.&lt;p&gt;I think Armstrong was one of the best cyclists ever, but he is tarnished now just like the others. It&amp;#x27;s a cruel sport.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>I support Gus</title><url>http://supportgus.dk/</url><text></text></story><parent_chain><item><author>mzl</author><text>I really don&apos;t understand Denmark when it comes to migration issues. They make it so hard to move there for non-EU citizens that it is ridiculous.&lt;p&gt;As an example, I know of more than one married couple with one Dane and one non-eu citizen that have been forced to live in Sweden instead of in Denmark due to troubles getting residency permits. Not letting a legitimate spouse get at least residency is just crazy.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ThomPete</author><text>As a Dane I can only say I don&apos;t understand it either. But I can give you a couple of small hints as to why it (unfortunately) is like it is.&lt;p&gt;1. Denmark has a very beneficial social welfare system.&lt;p&gt;If you break your leg in Denmark visiting, we will pick up the bill through our taxes (there is talks about changing that now)&lt;p&gt;If you get approved to stay here you gain access to more or less all social welfare.&lt;p&gt;Some people feel that this is being misused by immigrants. When they normally talk about immigrants they talk about arabs, africans etc. And there is some truth to that.&lt;p&gt;If you marry someone not from the EU they will gain access to all social welfare.&lt;p&gt;Because the nineties where ruled by a government that &quot;just took people in&quot; it created a backlash as problems started arising with ghettoes. This among other things lead to a (european style conservative) government backed by Danish Peoples Party a political party critical towards immigrants.&lt;p&gt;Since they secure the parliamentary power they have been able to get a lot of cases through.&lt;p&gt;One of them being the 24 year rule which basically is meant to hinder forced marriage between muslims living in Denmark and their spouses living in a country outside of EU.&lt;p&gt;This has been criticized by both left and right side of the political spectrum and is why some people move to sweden because they are much more lax about these things.&lt;p&gt;Personally I am a proponent of an open borders closed boxes policy and is voting for the only true liberal (semi american style) party that exist right now (form an ideological point of view) and I am sad to see every time people like Gus get&apos;s en trouble because of the splash damage that some of these laws result in.&lt;p&gt;Good thing is that Denmark is a small country and there is an election year. I am pretty sure that this will be taken up by the newspapers in Denmark and hopefully make it&apos;s way into the political debates on television. It&apos;s a perfect case for that.&lt;p&gt;I am also pretty sure Gus will be able to stay. The current government simply don&apos;t want to run the risk of angering their political base.</text></comment>

<story><title>I support Gus</title><url>http://supportgus.dk/</url><text></text></story><parent_chain><item><author>mzl</author><text>I really don&apos;t understand Denmark when it comes to migration issues. They make it so hard to move there for non-EU citizens that it is ridiculous.&lt;p&gt;As an example, I know of more than one married couple with one Dane and one non-eu citizen that have been forced to live in Sweden instead of in Denmark due to troubles getting residency permits. Not letting a legitimate spouse get at least residency is just crazy.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>MindTwister</author><text>Ah, but you see, for some reason we are terribly afraid of pro forma marriages being used for residency as well as marriage being used for [Family reunification]{&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_reunification&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_reunification&lt;/a&gt;}</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Facts about Wayland vs X</title><url>http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&amp;item=x_wayland_situation&amp;num=1</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>vardump</author><text>Wayland is a critical technology for Linux desktop community.&lt;p&gt;X11 has been a reliable workhorse, but its time is up - simply too much cruft accumulated over the years that&amp;#x27;s not even used anymore. Yet all of it needs to be continually supported, adding to complexity. No one uses X11 primitives for drawing apart from bitmap functionality - even repainting dirty regions (expose events) often involves sending over a new bitmap and using X11 to draw it. This is very inefficient.&lt;p&gt;To implement a reasonably fast GUI, X11 has essentially resorted to hacks (extensions). DRI2 (+GLX) is probably the most important of those. AFAIK, it&amp;#x27;s what almost everything uses for drawing, and does not work over network at all. Yes, modern X11 is local only. If you&amp;#x27;re on a network, it&amp;#x27;s back sending those uncompressed bitmaps. Even with all these hacks, X11+DRI2 can&amp;#x27;t even maintain tearing free display. Well, at least DRI3 should fix tearing...&lt;p&gt;So if none of modern software needs nothing but a bitmap surface to draw on, why implement and maintain anything else?&lt;p&gt;Which leaves us with Wayland criticizers&amp;#x27; favorite topic - network transparency (which X11 practically doesn&amp;#x27;t have either, but unfortunately that does little to stop some loud uninformed people):&lt;p&gt;Remote display software should use low latency video encoding for essentially same user experience as working locally. Preferably hardware accelerated. But even with software, you can encode a frame under 10ms, using for example a subset of h.264. Even if you added network latency, time for one frame network throughput and client display hardware retrace period, you&amp;#x27;d still typically end up with a figure well under 50ms. That&amp;#x27;d feel essentially local. It&amp;#x27;d beat easily X11 over network, VNC, RDP, etc. in latency and thus practical usability. Heck, that&amp;#x27;d even beat Xbox 360 or Playstation 3 game display latency when connected to a typical modern TV (70-170ms)! Many TVs do image processing that adds over 50ms of latency before image is actually displayed. (Note that this processing latency has nothing to do with &amp;quot;pixel response time&amp;quot;).&lt;p&gt;Why no one I know of has written remote display software that functions this way is beyond me. Anyone except OnLive and Gaikai, that is...&lt;p&gt;So, let the old X11 horse have its well-earned rest. It&amp;#x27;s time to move on.</text></comment>

<story><title>Facts about Wayland vs X</title><url>http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&amp;item=x_wayland_situation&amp;num=1</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jmhain</author><text>Daniel Stone actually did a talk involving much of the same subject matter called &amp;quot;The Real Story behind Wayland and X&amp;quot;. I&amp;#x27;d recommend that over this article (which was partially written by the same guy). He&amp;#x27;s actually a really charismatic speaker.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.youtube.com&amp;#x2F;watch?v=RIctzAQOe44&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.youtube.com&amp;#x2F;watch?v=RIctzAQOe44&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates</title><url>https://ntdca.com/pfizer-board-member-suggests-end-to-mask-vaccine-mandates/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dahfizz</author><text>&amp;gt; Because the data shows they don&amp;#x27;t matter.&lt;p&gt;Source? Because the CDC says otherwise.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; In the first full week of October, vaccinated New Yorkers with a prior Covid-19 case were 19.8 times less likely to catch the virus than their unvaccinated and uninfected peers, whereas people who were unvaccinated but previously infected were 14.7 times less likely, and vaccinated but uninfected New Yorkers were just 4.5 times less likely.&lt;p&gt;In other words, natural immunity alone can be up to 5X more protective than the vaccine alone, according to the CDC.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.forbes.com&amp;#x2F;sites&amp;#x2F;joewalsh&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;01&amp;#x2F;19&amp;#x2F;cdc-prior-covid-infection-offered-more-protection-against-delta-than-vaccines---but-both-together-did-best&amp;#x2F;?sh=140821063d04&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.forbes.com&amp;#x2F;sites&amp;#x2F;joewalsh&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;01&amp;#x2F;19&amp;#x2F;cdc-prior-c...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>bonzini</author><text>&amp;gt; why are they so adamant to vaccinate those with prior infection&lt;p&gt;Because the data shows they don&amp;#x27;t matter.&lt;p&gt;This is the same thing as deaths due to covid vs. deaths while positive to covid. Sure some people might have been miscounted as covid deaths but actually died due to cancer&amp;#x2F;car accident&amp;#x2F;whatever. Despite this the excess deaths over the past two years is much higher than the number of covid deaths; thus showing that miscounts must be a small minority which, in any case, is absolutely dwarfed by excess deaths not counted as covid deaths. It might even grow a little as testing improves but it still remains mostly irrelevant.&lt;p&gt;Likewise it may be that some people do not need a vaccination. However, we have a 30&amp;#x2F;70 split in number of covid hospitalizations, with 30 being vaccinated people, in countries where the split in the normal population is 90&amp;#x2F;10. This means that &lt;i&gt;despite&lt;/i&gt; some unvaccinated people having had prior infection the vaccine reduces hospitalizations by 20x. Given this data the most effective strategy is to just vaccinate everyone without what is effectively a pointless distinction.&lt;p&gt;As the number of unvaccinated but protected people will grow (through a combination of more infections, more vaccinations and more deaths), the proportion above will revert to 90&amp;#x2F;10 and unvaccinated people will not be an issue anymore. For now however analyzing the proportion of naturally immune people among the unvaccinated is, again, mostly irrelevant.</text></item><item><author>nu11ptr</author><text>Apologies in advance for getting on my soapbox, but this has been on my mind for a while.&lt;p&gt;The way in which the media has gotten everyone to say &amp;quot;the unvaccinated&amp;quot; is a &amp;#x27;disease&amp;#x27; against basic science (not even getting into the divisive nature of this). I would go as far as saying if you read any paper, study, or other that refers to the &amp;quot;unvaccinated&amp;quot; as a single cohort, you are reading vaccine propaganda, not science, or certainly not good science.&lt;p&gt;This must stop. Prior infection immunity is basic science that we&amp;#x27;ve known for eons, and ignoring it is so blatantly glaring an omission, it should make the most staunch pro-vaccine person pause and say: &amp;quot;why are they so adamant to vaccinate those with prior infection?&amp;quot;. One would expect prior infection to be robust, and multiple studies, including even the CDC&amp;#x27;s most recent shows it to be easily as good if not better and longer lasting than the vaccine. This should not come as a surprise to anyone.&lt;p&gt;If you think any of the above is &amp;quot;anti-vax&amp;quot; then I would suggest the media has won and science is dead. I&amp;#x27;m not suggesting the vaccine doesn&amp;#x27;t work. I&amp;#x27;m not suggesting it doesn&amp;#x27;t provide protection against severe disease and death. I&amp;#x27;m not suggesting anyone go out and intentionally try to get COVID, but a HUGE # of people have already had it and ignoring them is downright unscientific. If you are a rational person who wants to see good science and are unemotional and detached from outcomes, then you will want to see proper study cohorts, and combining prior infection in with the &amp;quot;unvaccinated&amp;quot; cohort, is just bad science. This bad science fuels the anti-vaxx movement even more, and honestly, it is hard blame them.</text></item><item><author>tzs</author><text>Something from the NYT mailing list yesterday:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; The Covid vaccines are remarkably effective at preventing serious illness. If you’re vaccinated, your chances of getting severely sick are extremely low. Even among people 65 and older, the combination of the vaccines’ effectiveness and the Omicron variant’s relative mildness means that Covid now appears to present less danger than a normal flu.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; For the unvaccinated, however, Covid is worse than any other common virus. It has killed more than 865,000 Americans, the vast majority unvaccinated. In the weeks before vaccines became widely available, Covid was the country’s No. 1 cause of death, above even cancer and heart disease.&lt;p&gt;At this point if an adult in the US is unvaccinated it is (1) almost certainly by choice (there are some people who cannot get it for medical reasons but they make up only a very tiny fraction of the unvaccinated), and (2) it is very unlikely that any evidence or logical arguments will chance their minds.&lt;p&gt;With COVID becoming endemic everyone is going to get antibodies, with the only choice being whether you get your first antibodies by vaccination or by getting COVID.&lt;p&gt;The only question really then is how fast do we want the unvaccinated to do the getting antibodies by getting COVID thing. The faster they get it, the faster we can be as done with COVID as we are ever going to be.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;d say the answer to that should be determined by the hospital capacity. If a region has sufficient hospital capacity that it would not be overwhelmed by the increase in COVID cases among the unvaccinated go ahead and lift most restrictions.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>lwkl</author><text>The person you are replying to is talking about hospitalizations for severe ilness. The study you are quoting is talking about covid infections in general. These two are not the same and the vaccine protects from the former (severe illness and death).</text></comment>

<story><title>Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates</title><url>https://ntdca.com/pfizer-board-member-suggests-end-to-mask-vaccine-mandates/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dahfizz</author><text>&amp;gt; Because the data shows they don&amp;#x27;t matter.&lt;p&gt;Source? Because the CDC says otherwise.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; In the first full week of October, vaccinated New Yorkers with a prior Covid-19 case were 19.8 times less likely to catch the virus than their unvaccinated and uninfected peers, whereas people who were unvaccinated but previously infected were 14.7 times less likely, and vaccinated but uninfected New Yorkers were just 4.5 times less likely.&lt;p&gt;In other words, natural immunity alone can be up to 5X more protective than the vaccine alone, according to the CDC.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.forbes.com&amp;#x2F;sites&amp;#x2F;joewalsh&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;01&amp;#x2F;19&amp;#x2F;cdc-prior-covid-infection-offered-more-protection-against-delta-than-vaccines---but-both-together-did-best&amp;#x2F;?sh=140821063d04&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.forbes.com&amp;#x2F;sites&amp;#x2F;joewalsh&amp;#x2F;2022&amp;#x2F;01&amp;#x2F;19&amp;#x2F;cdc-prior-c...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>bonzini</author><text>&amp;gt; why are they so adamant to vaccinate those with prior infection&lt;p&gt;Because the data shows they don&amp;#x27;t matter.&lt;p&gt;This is the same thing as deaths due to covid vs. deaths while positive to covid. Sure some people might have been miscounted as covid deaths but actually died due to cancer&amp;#x2F;car accident&amp;#x2F;whatever. Despite this the excess deaths over the past two years is much higher than the number of covid deaths; thus showing that miscounts must be a small minority which, in any case, is absolutely dwarfed by excess deaths not counted as covid deaths. It might even grow a little as testing improves but it still remains mostly irrelevant.&lt;p&gt;Likewise it may be that some people do not need a vaccination. However, we have a 30&amp;#x2F;70 split in number of covid hospitalizations, with 30 being vaccinated people, in countries where the split in the normal population is 90&amp;#x2F;10. This means that &lt;i&gt;despite&lt;/i&gt; some unvaccinated people having had prior infection the vaccine reduces hospitalizations by 20x. Given this data the most effective strategy is to just vaccinate everyone without what is effectively a pointless distinction.&lt;p&gt;As the number of unvaccinated but protected people will grow (through a combination of more infections, more vaccinations and more deaths), the proportion above will revert to 90&amp;#x2F;10 and unvaccinated people will not be an issue anymore. For now however analyzing the proportion of naturally immune people among the unvaccinated is, again, mostly irrelevant.</text></item><item><author>nu11ptr</author><text>Apologies in advance for getting on my soapbox, but this has been on my mind for a while.&lt;p&gt;The way in which the media has gotten everyone to say &amp;quot;the unvaccinated&amp;quot; is a &amp;#x27;disease&amp;#x27; against basic science (not even getting into the divisive nature of this). I would go as far as saying if you read any paper, study, or other that refers to the &amp;quot;unvaccinated&amp;quot; as a single cohort, you are reading vaccine propaganda, not science, or certainly not good science.&lt;p&gt;This must stop. Prior infection immunity is basic science that we&amp;#x27;ve known for eons, and ignoring it is so blatantly glaring an omission, it should make the most staunch pro-vaccine person pause and say: &amp;quot;why are they so adamant to vaccinate those with prior infection?&amp;quot;. One would expect prior infection to be robust, and multiple studies, including even the CDC&amp;#x27;s most recent shows it to be easily as good if not better and longer lasting than the vaccine. This should not come as a surprise to anyone.&lt;p&gt;If you think any of the above is &amp;quot;anti-vax&amp;quot; then I would suggest the media has won and science is dead. I&amp;#x27;m not suggesting the vaccine doesn&amp;#x27;t work. I&amp;#x27;m not suggesting it doesn&amp;#x27;t provide protection against severe disease and death. I&amp;#x27;m not suggesting anyone go out and intentionally try to get COVID, but a HUGE # of people have already had it and ignoring them is downright unscientific. If you are a rational person who wants to see good science and are unemotional and detached from outcomes, then you will want to see proper study cohorts, and combining prior infection in with the &amp;quot;unvaccinated&amp;quot; cohort, is just bad science. This bad science fuels the anti-vaxx movement even more, and honestly, it is hard blame them.</text></item><item><author>tzs</author><text>Something from the NYT mailing list yesterday:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; The Covid vaccines are remarkably effective at preventing serious illness. If you’re vaccinated, your chances of getting severely sick are extremely low. Even among people 65 and older, the combination of the vaccines’ effectiveness and the Omicron variant’s relative mildness means that Covid now appears to present less danger than a normal flu.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; For the unvaccinated, however, Covid is worse than any other common virus. It has killed more than 865,000 Americans, the vast majority unvaccinated. In the weeks before vaccines became widely available, Covid was the country’s No. 1 cause of death, above even cancer and heart disease.&lt;p&gt;At this point if an adult in the US is unvaccinated it is (1) almost certainly by choice (there are some people who cannot get it for medical reasons but they make up only a very tiny fraction of the unvaccinated), and (2) it is very unlikely that any evidence or logical arguments will chance their minds.&lt;p&gt;With COVID becoming endemic everyone is going to get antibodies, with the only choice being whether you get your first antibodies by vaccination or by getting COVID.&lt;p&gt;The only question really then is how fast do we want the unvaccinated to do the getting antibodies by getting COVID thing. The faster they get it, the faster we can be as done with COVID as we are ever going to be.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;d say the answer to that should be determined by the hospital capacity. If a region has sufficient hospital capacity that it would not be overwhelmed by the increase in COVID cases among the unvaccinated go ahead and lift most restrictions.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>eli</author><text>I don&amp;#x27;t think your math is correct there and that data is pre-Omicron.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.imperial.ac.uk&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;232698&amp;#x2F;omicron-largely-evades-immunity-from-past&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.imperial.ac.uk&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;232698&amp;#x2F;omicron-largely-evade...&lt;/a&gt; estimates that prior infection offered 85% protection against Delta but only 19% against Omicron.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Theranos destroyed subpoenaed SQL blood test database, prosecutors say</title><url>https://www.theregister.com/2021/01/12/theranos_database_loss/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>stevebmark</author><text>Theranos paid this company &amp;quot;IncRev&amp;quot;, and their CEO Shekar Chandrasekaran, $159,000&amp;#x2F;mo to host a database for them? That&amp;#x27;s an impressive scam! I wonder if it&amp;#x27;s money laundering or paying off friends, since any mildly competent technologist in the company would laugh them out of the room.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dmix</author><text>Nothing worse than Janet Yellen getting paid $500k speaker fees to talk to Citadel and a long list of other Wall St companies she will soon be directly regulating at the treasury dept.&lt;p&gt;She wasn’t getting paid the $7M total because of her deep interesting take on markets. They wanted direct access to the power players and to see how their mind works.&lt;p&gt;This revolving door with industry and policy makers gets a very uncritical eye by the media (especially compared to other frivolous background details) and obviously by the self morality of the participant speakers themselves.&lt;p&gt;I personally hope Chandrasekaran gets in trouble for hiding evidence. But nepotism and conflicts of interest seem to be super common in the upper tiers of industry and politics, which Theranos famously surrounded themselves with, right down to their board of directors being politicians and ex generals.</text></comment>

<story><title>Theranos destroyed subpoenaed SQL blood test database, prosecutors say</title><url>https://www.theregister.com/2021/01/12/theranos_database_loss/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>stevebmark</author><text>Theranos paid this company &amp;quot;IncRev&amp;quot;, and their CEO Shekar Chandrasekaran, $159,000&amp;#x2F;mo to host a database for them? That&amp;#x27;s an impressive scam! I wonder if it&amp;#x27;s money laundering or paying off friends, since any mildly competent technologist in the company would laugh them out of the room.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>silexia</author><text>I&amp;#x27;ve heard industry people tell of government contracts paying $300,000 a month to provide &amp;quot;support&amp;quot; for a WordPress site. They didn&amp;#x27;t get a single support request for over a year.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Who&apos;s behind the SWAT USA reshipping service?</title><url>https://krebsonsecurity.com/2023/11/whos-behind-the-swat-usa-reshipping-service/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Lacerda69</author><text>Why do these infamous master criminal hackers always reuse passwords&amp;#x2F;handles and leave traces?&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s relatively simple to use random credentials everywhere and to completely disconnect your hacker persona from RL.&lt;p&gt;Or is it that we only hear about those that do this...</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>devit</author><text>1. You learn about those and not the ones who successfully hide and keep a low profile&lt;p&gt;2. Proper security takes time and effort, so there is less time to devote to actual business, which means they are less likely to be successful at a scale that makes them widely known</text></comment>

<story><title>Who&apos;s behind the SWAT USA reshipping service?</title><url>https://krebsonsecurity.com/2023/11/whos-behind-the-swat-usa-reshipping-service/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Lacerda69</author><text>Why do these infamous master criminal hackers always reuse passwords&amp;#x2F;handles and leave traces?&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s relatively simple to use random credentials everywhere and to completely disconnect your hacker persona from RL.&lt;p&gt;Or is it that we only hear about those that do this...</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>krebsonsecurity</author><text>Some of the exposure in these cases is due to the fact that you have cybercriminals who&amp;#x27;ve been doing the same things for more than a decade. That is a very long time in which to make just a few key opsec mistakes, and also most RU cybercriminals back then did not take as much care to cover their tracks as they do today.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>An Introduction to Programming C-64 Demos</title><url>http://www.antimon.org/code/Linus/</url><text></text></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>bemmu</author><text>For Amiga demo programming with 68000 assembler, this video tutorial series is great as well: &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p83QUZ1-P10&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.youtube.com&amp;#x2F;watch?v=p83QUZ1-P10&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;I wish I could send these back in time to my teenage self.</text></comment>

<story><title>An Introduction to Programming C-64 Demos</title><url>http://www.antimon.org/code/Linus/</url><text></text></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>antirez</author><text>Example final result, apparently coded by puterman (the author of the tutorial) and others: &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfJjRRICzv8&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.youtube.com&amp;#x2F;watch?v=vfJjRRICzv8&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

train

<story><title>_why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius</title><url>http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/05/15/why-a-tale-of-a-post-modern-genius/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>gdp</author><text>Articles about _why on HN seem to always take on a particularly sycophantic quality. As a non-fan of Ruby, his contributions to programming outside of that community seem minimal. The ethic that people appear to ascribe to him (&quot;programming as art&quot;) is precisely the opposite to that which I generally advocate (&quot;programming as science&quot;). I (and others) often suggest that the former approach is actually harmful to software quality in many cases, particularly within teams.&lt;p&gt;Fundamentally I think my objection is to elevating a slightly odd-ball programmer to messianic status based on a mildly creepy fandom that manifests primarily as people vastly over-stating the contributions of this one guy in HN comments.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>antirez</author><text>Programming as science: not consistent with reality IMHO. My argument is that it&apos;s pretty simple to build a good computer scientist: take a guy with good IQ and put it into a good university. But there are zero guarantees that you&apos;ll end with a good &lt;i&gt;coder&lt;/i&gt; also, as coding is a matter of taste, tradeoffs, design decisions, creativity, ability to think out of the box, and so forth.&lt;p&gt;The problem is that most of our industry is not ready to accept this news. There was &lt;i&gt;no&lt;/i&gt; so important economic process like IT in the past where creativity and art had the same impact as it is happening with programming. Check the software and the sites you are enjoying every day: are they made by great scientists? The big majority are not.&lt;p&gt;But at the same time, the reverse is true. If you have good scientists you can create any complex program or system without problems. Look at all the PHDs at google, the result is a wonderful piece of technology, from the search engine itself to the cluster and other stuff they are running. But this is an engineering problem indeed, so it is a perfect fit for them.&lt;p&gt;But not everything is like that in our field. This is why for instance a big company like Google is not having a big impact in programming itself. If you see the reality most of their products for the masses are not working well, Ruby on Rails was not produced there, and so forth. It&apos;s not that I&apos;ve something against Google but it is the perfect example of &quot;company of scientists&quot;.</text></comment>

<story><title>_why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius</title><url>http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/05/15/why-a-tale-of-a-post-modern-genius/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>gdp</author><text>Articles about _why on HN seem to always take on a particularly sycophantic quality. As a non-fan of Ruby, his contributions to programming outside of that community seem minimal. The ethic that people appear to ascribe to him (&quot;programming as art&quot;) is precisely the opposite to that which I generally advocate (&quot;programming as science&quot;). I (and others) often suggest that the former approach is actually harmful to software quality in many cases, particularly within teams.&lt;p&gt;Fundamentally I think my objection is to elevating a slightly odd-ball programmer to messianic status based on a mildly creepy fandom that manifests primarily as people vastly over-stating the contributions of this one guy in HN comments.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>davidalln</author><text>I think dismissing &quot;programming as art&quot; as irrelevant and hurtful to the community is dangerous. Here we have the tools to create a near-infinite amount of almost everything that can run on a computer. We use code to run complicated robots that can drive a course without human input, solve the most complicated mathematic problems of today, and create artificial intelligence with the ability to learn as it ages. Yet at the same time, we use code to make short chiptune songs and fun small games hacked away in an hour or two.&lt;p&gt;Wikipedia defines art as &quot;the product of deliberately arranging elements in a way to affect the senses or emotions&quot;, and science as &quot;the systematic enterprise of gathering knowledge about the world and organizing and condensing that knowledge into testable laws and theories.&quot; Why do these two things have to be mutually exclusive? Through creation and exploring, such as in _why&apos;s projects, we are further &quot;gathering knowledge&quot; about the limits computers can be used. And at the same time, we are creating art as these programs have had a clear impact on at least the Ruby community.&lt;p&gt;And, bringing up a more &quot;sciencey&quot; example, if the fact that my handheld calculator can solve complicated algebra and calculus equations in less than a second doesn&apos;t &quot;affect [your] senses or emotions&quot;, then you need a reality check on just how impressive technology has come in such a short time.&lt;p&gt;I personally believe that programming is one of the rawest forms of creation imaginable, and therefore must be of some artistic worth. Simply calling it science and moving on does a disservice to those who slaved for so many hours working on their piece of computer science history.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Blocking Kiwifarms</title><url>https://blog.cloudflare.com/kiwifarms-blocked/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>danShumway</author><text>&amp;gt; It takes the the power of ideas and elevates them above physical force.&lt;p&gt;This is exactly why dropping Kiwi Farms was the right decision. There is a difference between saying hateful things and doxing and harassing people with threats of violence.&lt;p&gt;We don&amp;#x27;t even need to dip into the endless debate about tolerating hate -- there&amp;#x27;s no level of ideological indirection here, Kiwi Farms was just very straightforwardly driving people offline with threats of physical harm and real-world harassment.</text></item><item><author>xupybd</author><text>Free speech is about giving people the freedom to say things I find disgusting. It&amp;#x27;s about giving each individual the choice to listen to what ever influence they wish. It takes the the power of ideas and elevates them above physical force.</text></item><item><author>notatoad</author><text>&amp;gt;rather than free speech&lt;p&gt;i encourage anybody who is calls themselves a &amp;quot;free speech advocate&amp;quot; to consider what kiwifarms has been doing to &amp;quot;free speech&amp;quot;. their intimidation campaigns have been doing a lot more to harm the cause of free speech than this decision by cloudflare is. if you &lt;i&gt;really&lt;/i&gt; believe in free speech, you understand that trans people deserve free speech too, and kiwifarms harrasment campaigns have been harming their free speech. free speech is for &lt;i&gt;everybody&lt;/i&gt;, not just the people who have opinions you agree with, and being openly trans is a form of speech.</text></item><item><author>eastdakota</author><text>Reading over the comments I see everyone thinking this is about “free speech.” It is not. It’s about what in the US you’d call “due process” and in all the rest of the world you’d call “rule of law.”&lt;p&gt;Our decision today was that the risk created by the content could not be dealt with in a timely enough matter by the traditional rule of law systems.&lt;p&gt;That’s a failure of the rule of law on two dimensions: we shouldn’t be the ones making that call, and no one else who should was stepping up in spite of being aware of the threat.&lt;p&gt;Encourage you when these issues arise to think of them in the rule of law context, rather than free speech, in order to have a more robust conversation with frameworks that have an appeal and applicability across nearly every nation and government.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>xupybd</author><text>No that&amp;#x27;s why this issue should have been dealt with promptly and firmly by a justice system not by a corporate choice.&lt;p&gt;We can&amp;#x27;t have a society that requires CEO to decide who is morally acceptable and who is not.&lt;p&gt;If law&amp;#x27;s have been broken we need law enforcement.</text></comment>

<story><title>Blocking Kiwifarms</title><url>https://blog.cloudflare.com/kiwifarms-blocked/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>danShumway</author><text>&amp;gt; It takes the the power of ideas and elevates them above physical force.&lt;p&gt;This is exactly why dropping Kiwi Farms was the right decision. There is a difference between saying hateful things and doxing and harassing people with threats of violence.&lt;p&gt;We don&amp;#x27;t even need to dip into the endless debate about tolerating hate -- there&amp;#x27;s no level of ideological indirection here, Kiwi Farms was just very straightforwardly driving people offline with threats of physical harm and real-world harassment.</text></item><item><author>xupybd</author><text>Free speech is about giving people the freedom to say things I find disgusting. It&amp;#x27;s about giving each individual the choice to listen to what ever influence they wish. It takes the the power of ideas and elevates them above physical force.</text></item><item><author>notatoad</author><text>&amp;gt;rather than free speech&lt;p&gt;i encourage anybody who is calls themselves a &amp;quot;free speech advocate&amp;quot; to consider what kiwifarms has been doing to &amp;quot;free speech&amp;quot;. their intimidation campaigns have been doing a lot more to harm the cause of free speech than this decision by cloudflare is. if you &lt;i&gt;really&lt;/i&gt; believe in free speech, you understand that trans people deserve free speech too, and kiwifarms harrasment campaigns have been harming their free speech. free speech is for &lt;i&gt;everybody&lt;/i&gt;, not just the people who have opinions you agree with, and being openly trans is a form of speech.</text></item><item><author>eastdakota</author><text>Reading over the comments I see everyone thinking this is about “free speech.” It is not. It’s about what in the US you’d call “due process” and in all the rest of the world you’d call “rule of law.”&lt;p&gt;Our decision today was that the risk created by the content could not be dealt with in a timely enough matter by the traditional rule of law systems.&lt;p&gt;That’s a failure of the rule of law on two dimensions: we shouldn’t be the ones making that call, and no one else who should was stepping up in spite of being aware of the threat.&lt;p&gt;Encourage you when these issues arise to think of them in the rule of law context, rather than free speech, in order to have a more robust conversation with frameworks that have an appeal and applicability across nearly every nation and government.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>stale2002</author><text>Although this is an interesting argument, the issue in this context is that the US legal system, has yet to declare what it is that KF is doing to be illegal.&lt;p&gt;Maybe they would have lost in court. But as of yet, even though there has been multiple lawsuits against KFs, KF farms has won every thing lawsuit.&lt;p&gt;That is the issue you have to grapple with. That, for all known knowledge that we have, from the legal system, nobody has proven their actions to be illegal.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>“Emergent” abilities in LLMs actually develop gradually and predictably – study</title><url>https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-quickly-do-large-language-models-learn-unexpected-skills-20240213/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Gisbitus</author><text>Just like it&amp;#x27;s mentioned later in the article: it doesn&amp;#x27;t really matter if you get an addition &lt;i&gt;mostly&lt;/i&gt; right. You either get it right or you don&amp;#x27;t. I still appreciate their effort though, because even after altering the grading system, there were still some emergent abilities.</text></item><item><author>a_wild_dandan</author><text>There are several issues with the study:&lt;p&gt;1. Replacing pass&amp;#x2F;fail accuracy with smoother alternatives (e.g token edit distance) could be a terrible proxy for skill, depending on the task.&lt;p&gt;2. Even by the authors&amp;#x27; metrics, they _still_ find a few potentially emergent abilities.&lt;p&gt;3. Hindsight is 20-20. Yes, we can revisit the data and fiddle until we find transforms that erase emergence from aptitude plots. The fact is, folk used commonplace test accuracy measurements, and the results were unpredictable and surprising. That&amp;#x27;s the true notable phenomenon.&lt;p&gt;I think there&amp;#x27;s value in the paper. Just...don&amp;#x27;t take its conclusions too far.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>arka2147483647</author><text>Assume we have a child, and we test him regularly:&lt;p&gt;- Test 1: First he can just draw squiggles on the math test&lt;p&gt;- Test 2: Then he can do arithmetic correctly&lt;p&gt;- Test 3: He fails on the last details on the algebraic calculation.&lt;p&gt;Now, event though he fails on all tests, any reasonable parent would see that he improving nicely, and would be able to work in his chosen field in a year or so.&lt;p&gt;Or alternatively, if we talk about AI, we can set the Test as a threshold, and we see the results are continuously trending upwards, and we can expect the curve to breach the threshold in the future.&lt;p&gt;That is; measuring improvement, instead of pass&amp;#x2F;fail, allows one to predict when we might be able to use the AI for something.</text></comment>

<story><title>“Emergent” abilities in LLMs actually develop gradually and predictably – study</title><url>https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-quickly-do-large-language-models-learn-unexpected-skills-20240213/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Gisbitus</author><text>Just like it&amp;#x27;s mentioned later in the article: it doesn&amp;#x27;t really matter if you get an addition &lt;i&gt;mostly&lt;/i&gt; right. You either get it right or you don&amp;#x27;t. I still appreciate their effort though, because even after altering the grading system, there were still some emergent abilities.</text></item><item><author>a_wild_dandan</author><text>There are several issues with the study:&lt;p&gt;1. Replacing pass&amp;#x2F;fail accuracy with smoother alternatives (e.g token edit distance) could be a terrible proxy for skill, depending on the task.&lt;p&gt;2. Even by the authors&amp;#x27; metrics, they _still_ find a few potentially emergent abilities.&lt;p&gt;3. Hindsight is 20-20. Yes, we can revisit the data and fiddle until we find transforms that erase emergence from aptitude plots. The fact is, folk used commonplace test accuracy measurements, and the results were unpredictable and surprising. That&amp;#x27;s the true notable phenomenon.&lt;p&gt;I think there&amp;#x27;s value in the paper. Just...don&amp;#x27;t take its conclusions too far.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>raincole</author><text>Human beings do arithmetic problems wrong all the time so I&amp;#x27;m not sure &amp;quot;doing addition 100% right&amp;quot; is a merit of intelligence.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m not saying LLM will achieve AGI (I don&amp;#x27;t know if it will, or when it does we&amp;#x27;ll even know). But somehow people seem to be judging AI&amp;#x27;s intelligence with this simple procedural:&lt;p&gt;1. Find a task that AI can&amp;#x27;t do perfectly. 2. Gotcha! AI isn&amp;#x27;t intelligent.&lt;p&gt;It just makes me question humans&amp;#x27; intelligence if anything.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>How the F.B.I. Can Detain, Render and Threaten Without Risk</title><url>http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/03/opinion/how-the-fbi-can-detain-render-and-threaten-without-risk.html?_r=0</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jsprogrammer</author><text>Don&amp;#x27;t lie?&lt;p&gt;FBI would need to prove a lie anyway. Not the easiest thing.&lt;p&gt;Edit: Some of these responses seem to be assuming &amp;quot;Don&amp;#x27;t lie&amp;quot; is the logical complement of &amp;quot;tell the truth&amp;quot;. That is not the case.&lt;p&gt;Anyway, &amp;quot;tell the truth&amp;quot; is not a &lt;i&gt;real&lt;/i&gt; strategy. That is: the sentence is essentially meaningless. We already know that &lt;i&gt;actual&lt;/i&gt; truth is impossible to capture.</text></item><item><author>mox1</author><text>Well this is especially (aka more) important when talking to a &amp;quot;Federal Agent&amp;quot;. This can be US Marshals, Secret Service, Fish and Wildlife management, DEA, etc. (if you find yourself in this situation ask the person if they are an &amp;quot;1811&amp;quot; job series). Lying to a federal agent is always an actual felony (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1001).&lt;p&gt;Lying to a local police officer, state patrol is not always a crime (local, state laws).</text></item><item><author>ams6110</author><text>This is good advice for talking to any law enforcement really. They are not on your side if they are asking you questions.</text></item><item><author>dccoolgai</author><text>Advice from my father-in-law, who is a prominent attorney: &amp;quot;Never, ever talk to the FBI without a lawyer - even if you want to help them as a witness... because if they don&amp;#x27;t like the truth you&amp;#x27;re telling them, they can (and often do) say you lied to them which is a federal offense. If you have your attorney, they at least know there is a credible witness present who is keeping track of who said what.&amp;quot;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>bmelton</author><text>So, you tell them the truth, and say &amp;quot;Sorry officer, I wasn&amp;#x27;t in town that day,&amp;quot; only they later find out that there&amp;#x27;s an eyewitness who says that you were in town that day, and your credit card purchases show you buying a cup of coffee a few blocks from where the eyewitness saw you.&lt;p&gt;It doesn&amp;#x27;t matter that the eyewitness was mistaken, and just saw someone who looked like you who drove a similar looking vehicle, or that the purchase was made by your wife who was borrowing your credit card, because that coffee shop didn&amp;#x27;t have security cameras proving one way or the other.&lt;p&gt;At the end of the day, you&amp;#x27;re looked at as guilty, for a time at least, and possibly forever. You have to waste your every spare dollar hiring a defense attorney to prove your innocence. You have to fend off mobs of social justice warriors who have ruined your reputation on the internet and real life, who may have lowered your business&amp;#x27; Yelp score to approximately zero. You have to find a new job, because your old one fired you once you were indicted, and the newspapers justified them by placing your picture on the front page as the guilty party, but only printing the retraction months later on page 18.&lt;p&gt;And this is of course a scenario predicated on the notion that your attorney is able to actually get you found innocent, and you aren&amp;#x27;t further hindered by spending decades in prison for a crime you didn&amp;#x27;t commit.</text></comment>

<story><title>How the F.B.I. Can Detain, Render and Threaten Without Risk</title><url>http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/03/opinion/how-the-fbi-can-detain-render-and-threaten-without-risk.html?_r=0</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jsprogrammer</author><text>Don&amp;#x27;t lie?&lt;p&gt;FBI would need to prove a lie anyway. Not the easiest thing.&lt;p&gt;Edit: Some of these responses seem to be assuming &amp;quot;Don&amp;#x27;t lie&amp;quot; is the logical complement of &amp;quot;tell the truth&amp;quot;. That is not the case.&lt;p&gt;Anyway, &amp;quot;tell the truth&amp;quot; is not a &lt;i&gt;real&lt;/i&gt; strategy. That is: the sentence is essentially meaningless. We already know that &lt;i&gt;actual&lt;/i&gt; truth is impossible to capture.</text></item><item><author>mox1</author><text>Well this is especially (aka more) important when talking to a &amp;quot;Federal Agent&amp;quot;. This can be US Marshals, Secret Service, Fish and Wildlife management, DEA, etc. (if you find yourself in this situation ask the person if they are an &amp;quot;1811&amp;quot; job series). Lying to a federal agent is always an actual felony (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1001).&lt;p&gt;Lying to a local police officer, state patrol is not always a crime (local, state laws).</text></item><item><author>ams6110</author><text>This is good advice for talking to any law enforcement really. They are not on your side if they are asking you questions.</text></item><item><author>dccoolgai</author><text>Advice from my father-in-law, who is a prominent attorney: &amp;quot;Never, ever talk to the FBI without a lawyer - even if you want to help them as a witness... because if they don&amp;#x27;t like the truth you&amp;#x27;re telling them, they can (and often do) say you lied to them which is a federal offense. If you have your attorney, they at least know there is a credible witness present who is keeping track of who said what.&amp;quot;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kefka</author><text>&amp;quot;You wouldn&amp;#x27;t be there if you weren&amp;#x27;t guilty.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;ve heard this line from people who&amp;#x27;ve served on juries before.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>The Impossible Burger</title><url>https://www.wired.com/story/the-impossible-burger</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jxcole</author><text>The fact that they argued that leghemoglobin is safe because it is similar to other globins is kind of weird. A chemistry professor once told me that the chemical Thalidomide is a medicine that can be used to treat morning sickness, but if you only reverse the chirality it can cause birth defects.&lt;p&gt;In case you don&amp;#x27;t know, if you reverse the chirality of a molecule it is essentially what the same molecule would be when viewed in a mirror, with all it&amp;#x27;s directions reversed.&lt;p&gt;source: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.wikibooks.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Organic_Chemistry&amp;#x2F;Chirality&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.wikibooks.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Organic_Chemistry&amp;#x2F;Chirality&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>plus</author><text>The greater issue with thalidomide is that it racemizes in the body. That means even if you take the enantiomerically pure form of thalidomide which treats morning sickness, the teratogenic form will be generated in the body.</text></comment>

<story><title>The Impossible Burger</title><url>https://www.wired.com/story/the-impossible-burger</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jxcole</author><text>The fact that they argued that leghemoglobin is safe because it is similar to other globins is kind of weird. A chemistry professor once told me that the chemical Thalidomide is a medicine that can be used to treat morning sickness, but if you only reverse the chirality it can cause birth defects.&lt;p&gt;In case you don&amp;#x27;t know, if you reverse the chirality of a molecule it is essentially what the same molecule would be when viewed in a mirror, with all it&amp;#x27;s directions reversed.&lt;p&gt;source: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.wikibooks.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Organic_Chemistry&amp;#x2F;Chirality&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.wikibooks.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Organic_Chemistry&amp;#x2F;Chirality&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>legulere</author><text>If you look into the superfamily of globulins, globular proteins you can even find the highly toxic ricin.&lt;p&gt;Also wikipedia states about non-human globulins that &amp;quot;these proteins can cause allergic reactions if they bind with human IgE antibodies.&amp;quot; &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Globulin#Nonhuman_globulins&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Globulin#Nonhuman_globulins&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Nuclear Commission Approves a Safety Aspect of NuScale Power’s Advanced Reactor</title><url>http://www.powermag.com/press-releases/u-s-nuclear-regulatory-commission-approves-key-safety-aspect-to-nuscale-powers-advanced-reactor-design/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>gene-h</author><text>The headline is misleading, they haven&amp;#x27;t approved the design yet. However, they&amp;#x27;ve been able to certify that the reactor does not need a certain standard of backup power supply and electrical circuitry due to the passive safety features of the design. This standard essentially requires that nuclear power plants have a connection to the grid and an on site backup generator to safety systems that are on completely separate circuits from the nuclear power plant electrical generation systems.&lt;p&gt;Not having to do this makes it cheaper for NuScale to deploy powerplants. And it also makes it easier for them to build powerplants in remote places where a connection to the electrical grid is not available[0].&lt;p&gt;[0]&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nrc.gov&amp;#x2F;docs&amp;#x2F;ML1616&amp;#x2F;ML16169A148.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.nrc.gov&amp;#x2F;docs&amp;#x2F;ML1616&amp;#x2F;ML16169A148.pdf&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>

<story><title>Nuclear Commission Approves a Safety Aspect of NuScale Power’s Advanced Reactor</title><url>http://www.powermag.com/press-releases/u-s-nuclear-regulatory-commission-approves-key-safety-aspect-to-nuscale-powers-advanced-reactor-design/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>CryoLogic</author><text>50MW per reactor at 12 per plant is 600MW. Or 600k homes powered by a single power plant. Nuclear is now very safe, and cleaner than coal. I am glad this project is moving forwards.&lt;p&gt;EDIT: Opportunities for more skilled jobs is always a plus too.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>U.K. regulators order Meta to sell Giphy</title><url>https://www.axios.com/uk-regulators-order-facebook-meta-giphy-sale-457ccd20-f28e-4631-a508-a88639b1b121.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>pmontra</author><text>&amp;gt; Meta argued that the regulator was “sending a chilling message to start-up entrepreneurs: do not build new companies because you will not be able to sell them.”&lt;p&gt;This overlooks the traditional and perhaps now unpopular reason to start a company: making money by selling something useful. No need to sell the company. By the way, Facebook buys, does not sell.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>notahacker</author><text>Ironically, that statement is the strongest argument in favour of blocking the acquisition I&amp;#x27;ve heard.&lt;p&gt;Any company so arrogant about its market dominance it assumes that the only way for an entrepreneur to succeed in building a company in its market is to sell &lt;i&gt;to them&lt;/i&gt; deserves to be broken up.</text></comment>

<story><title>U.K. regulators order Meta to sell Giphy</title><url>https://www.axios.com/uk-regulators-order-facebook-meta-giphy-sale-457ccd20-f28e-4631-a508-a88639b1b121.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>pmontra</author><text>&amp;gt; Meta argued that the regulator was “sending a chilling message to start-up entrepreneurs: do not build new companies because you will not be able to sell them.”&lt;p&gt;This overlooks the traditional and perhaps now unpopular reason to start a company: making money by selling something useful. No need to sell the company. By the way, Facebook buys, does not sell.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>lordnacho</author><text>Indeed, you have to wonder if the world might be a better place if mergers were just not allowed. There&amp;#x27;s a famous Adam Smith quote about people in the same business coming together to screw the consumer. Mergers are perhaps the ultimate collusion.&lt;p&gt;For instance, what if the default position was that mergers were banned, except where you could convincingly show that everyone is better off? For instance in dying industries where scale is necessary.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Terms of Service; Didn&apos;t Read</title><url>http://tosdr.org/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>rossjudson</author><text>One straightforward fix: A law that says an &amp;quot;I Agree&amp;quot; button only binds the user to the text that&amp;#x27;s actually visible on the screen. More text? More buttons!&lt;p&gt;That will drastically cut down on the boilerplate. Want to straitjacket your users with 60 pages of user agreement? No problem! You&amp;#x27;re only 60 button clicks away from complete lack of liability.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>gyardley</author><text>Is this not already common in certain industries? I&amp;#x27;ve seen plenty of video game terms of service that make you scroll to the bottom before the &amp;#x27;accept&amp;#x27; button can be clicked, making all the text at least temporarily visible on the screen. (I recall the World of Warcraft client doing this after every single patch update - no idea if it still does. I&amp;#x27;m pretty sure every time I update my PS3 I go through this experience, too.)&lt;p&gt;That said, one can scroll rather quickly.</text></comment>

<story><title>Terms of Service; Didn&apos;t Read</title><url>http://tosdr.org/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>rossjudson</author><text>One straightforward fix: A law that says an &amp;quot;I Agree&amp;quot; button only binds the user to the text that&amp;#x27;s actually visible on the screen. More text? More buttons!&lt;p&gt;That will drastically cut down on the boilerplate. Want to straitjacket your users with 60 pages of user agreement? No problem! You&amp;#x27;re only 60 button clicks away from complete lack of liability.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>thaumasiotes</author><text>Some people have taller monitors than others. Some browse in different font sizes. There is no way, even in theory, of determining what was visible on screen.&lt;p&gt;edit: really, this is the exact same problem as &amp;quot;some people have taller screens than others&amp;quot;, but some people have taller browser windows than others too. If I want to get some text off screen before clicking &amp;quot;I agree&amp;quot;, it&amp;#x27;s fully within my power to do so.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>Psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy vs. placebo in treatment of alcohol disorder</title><url>https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2795625</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>UniverseHacker</author><text>&amp;gt; I think it&amp;#x27;s possible that the phenomenological experience _is_ the mechanism of action for these substances, that the actual experience of the trip is what makes the difference.&lt;p&gt;I was really confused about the entire concept of blinding a study like this until I read your comment... Now I realize they are indeed proceeding from the assumption that the phenomenological experience is somehow distinct from the mechanism of action.&lt;p&gt;That seems really unlikely to me- these drugs are unique because of the phenomenological experience! It seems self evident that this experience is the reason for therapeutic effects.&lt;p&gt;Imagine the absurdity of trying to design a study blinding the effects of meditation for example. Meditation has measurable benefits, but what are the chances those aren&amp;#x27;t caused by the psychological effects of experiencing meditation?</text></item><item><author>roughly</author><text>Something that&amp;#x27;s going to be interesting with psychedelics and psychedelic research is that a lot of this sort of research seems to try to &amp;quot;control for&amp;quot; the phenomenological experience in favor of focusing on the biochemical mechanism of action - I think it&amp;#x27;s possible that the phenomenological experience _is_ the mechanism of action for these substances, that the actual experience of the trip is what makes the difference.</text></item><item><author>phren0logy</author><text>The comparison condition was psilocybin or diphenhydramine (Benadryl), and both groups got addiction counseling.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;Participants correctly guessed their treatment assignment in 93.6% of the first sessions, reporting a mean (SD) certainty of 88.5% (23.2%). In the second session, 94.7% guessed correctly, and mean (SD) certainty was 90.6% (21.5%). Study therapists correctly guessed treatment 92.4% of the time for first sessions and 97.4% for second sessions, and their mean (SD) certainties were 92.8% (16.3%) and 95.4% (2.9%), respectively.&lt;p&gt;This is not a criticism, as these trials are very hard to blind, but as you can see in hindsight they could as well have not bothered with blinding at all. So we need to interpret this as a randomized but unblinded trial.&lt;p&gt;The researchers are well aware of this, and I suspect it will inform the next steps of their research.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;Several limitations of the study warrant discussion. First, diphenhydramine was ineffective in maintaining the blind after drug administration, so biased expectancies could have influenced results. Control medications such as methylphenidate,42 niacin,2 and low-dose psilocybin1 likewise did not adequately maintain blinding in past psilocybin trials, so this issue remains a challenge for clinical research on psychedelics.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mrcartmeneses</author><text>It’s worth trying because it could be that there is a chemical mechanism rather than it being the trip. For example ketamine can ‘cure’ people of alcoholism and depression at doses that do not produce ‘profound’ experiences or at doses that do. Having said that I accidentally had a ‘therapy’ session while completely off my tits on LSD and it helped with things that I’d not previously been helped with on other trips.&lt;p&gt;The issues at hand are complex, it’s worth trying to control just to find out what the mechanisms are.&lt;p&gt;Also apologies for all of the air quotes in this ‘comment’</text></comment>

<story><title>Psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy vs. placebo in treatment of alcohol disorder</title><url>https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2795625</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>UniverseHacker</author><text>&amp;gt; I think it&amp;#x27;s possible that the phenomenological experience _is_ the mechanism of action for these substances, that the actual experience of the trip is what makes the difference.&lt;p&gt;I was really confused about the entire concept of blinding a study like this until I read your comment... Now I realize they are indeed proceeding from the assumption that the phenomenological experience is somehow distinct from the mechanism of action.&lt;p&gt;That seems really unlikely to me- these drugs are unique because of the phenomenological experience! It seems self evident that this experience is the reason for therapeutic effects.&lt;p&gt;Imagine the absurdity of trying to design a study blinding the effects of meditation for example. Meditation has measurable benefits, but what are the chances those aren&amp;#x27;t caused by the psychological effects of experiencing meditation?</text></item><item><author>roughly</author><text>Something that&amp;#x27;s going to be interesting with psychedelics and psychedelic research is that a lot of this sort of research seems to try to &amp;quot;control for&amp;quot; the phenomenological experience in favor of focusing on the biochemical mechanism of action - I think it&amp;#x27;s possible that the phenomenological experience _is_ the mechanism of action for these substances, that the actual experience of the trip is what makes the difference.</text></item><item><author>phren0logy</author><text>The comparison condition was psilocybin or diphenhydramine (Benadryl), and both groups got addiction counseling.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;Participants correctly guessed their treatment assignment in 93.6% of the first sessions, reporting a mean (SD) certainty of 88.5% (23.2%). In the second session, 94.7% guessed correctly, and mean (SD) certainty was 90.6% (21.5%). Study therapists correctly guessed treatment 92.4% of the time for first sessions and 97.4% for second sessions, and their mean (SD) certainties were 92.8% (16.3%) and 95.4% (2.9%), respectively.&lt;p&gt;This is not a criticism, as these trials are very hard to blind, but as you can see in hindsight they could as well have not bothered with blinding at all. So we need to interpret this as a randomized but unblinded trial.&lt;p&gt;The researchers are well aware of this, and I suspect it will inform the next steps of their research.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;Several limitations of the study warrant discussion. First, diphenhydramine was ineffective in maintaining the blind after drug administration, so biased expectancies could have influenced results. Control medications such as methylphenidate,42 niacin,2 and low-dose psilocybin1 likewise did not adequately maintain blinding in past psilocybin trials, so this issue remains a challenge for clinical research on psychedelics.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>BurningFrog</author><text>...or try to study the effects of a university education with a double blind study.&lt;p&gt;There are probably rules demanding blinding for these studies. Let&amp;#x27;s hope they don&amp;#x27;t hold back the research for too long.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>W3C recommends WebAssembly</title><url>https://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/8123</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>EvanAnderson</author><text>Even if we don&amp;#x27;t lose the HTML-centered model, we are probably going to lose control of our browsers. Eventually somebody is going to ship a product that&amp;#x27;s nothing more than a browser implemented in WASM that runs inside your browser. The &amp;quot;inner browser&amp;quot; won&amp;#x27;t have content filtering, privacy controls, DOM inspector, or a Javascript debugger (for the Javascript engine running on the &amp;quot;inner browser&amp;quot;) that you can interact with. You&amp;#x27;ll have to agree to let them run arbitrary code on your machine to even view the &amp;quot;website&amp;quot;. There will be no &amp;quot;browse w&amp;#x2F;o Javascript&amp;quot; option in that future.&lt;p&gt;The kind of jerks who liked adding Javascript to block right-clicking, blocking &amp;quot;Paste&amp;quot; into password fields, etc, are going to absolutely love using the browser-in-a-browser product to deliver their &amp;quot;website&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;For the inevitable replies: Yes-- you can already do this with minified Javascript. WASM, being targeted for performance, is just going to make this kind of asshattery faster.</text></item><item><author>6gvONxR4sf7o</author><text>Whatever you think about javascript, I love the historic separation between content and interactivity. I dislike that so many static pages won&amp;#x27;t load without JS and that we&amp;#x27;re moving further in that direction. I hope the evolution towards &amp;quot;browser as OS&amp;quot; doesn&amp;#x27;t hurt the content vs interactivity separation. Could we ever lose the HTML centered model?&lt;p&gt;That could mean we lose hackability and the ability to write extensions or even scrape the web without a BigCo webcrawler&amp;#x27;s level of infra investment. Is everything going to turn into an opaque single page app? Technically, webassembly is really cool, but I worry about where the browser is headed.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mahidhar</author><text>Unfortunately, I must agree with you that there are definitely some very troubling implications to how WebAssembly might be used to build more effective walled gardens on the web.&lt;p&gt;I can easily imagine a &amp;quot;platform&amp;quot; WASM module which acts as a runtime for other WASM modules built by &amp;quot;app&amp;quot; developers. This Platform module can be easily cached by FAANG or other big commercial interests, similar to AMP by Google (maybe even be pre-bundled into the browser?). The only way to discover, download and run these other apps is through this curated Platform module. All this could be rendered through something like the Canvas API instead of the DOM, which again is managed on a low level by the Platform and in turn exposes higher level API&amp;#x27;s for the Apps. The Platform also has built in support for Ad networks, tracking, etc., which cannot be disabled without disabling the whole ecosystem of apps. And of course, like any good play&amp;#x2F;app store, it is completely incompatible with anything else, leading to new levels of Balkanization of the web.&lt;p&gt;I hope that this isn&amp;#x27;t the case, and I&amp;#x27;m completely wrong about this. But I just can&amp;#x27;t shake the feeling that as a community, we are championing WebAssembly as purely a performance win, without considering how big commercial interests might seek to exploit this new technology.&lt;p&gt;Edit: typo with AMP</text></comment>

<story><title>W3C recommends WebAssembly</title><url>https://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/8123</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>EvanAnderson</author><text>Even if we don&amp;#x27;t lose the HTML-centered model, we are probably going to lose control of our browsers. Eventually somebody is going to ship a product that&amp;#x27;s nothing more than a browser implemented in WASM that runs inside your browser. The &amp;quot;inner browser&amp;quot; won&amp;#x27;t have content filtering, privacy controls, DOM inspector, or a Javascript debugger (for the Javascript engine running on the &amp;quot;inner browser&amp;quot;) that you can interact with. You&amp;#x27;ll have to agree to let them run arbitrary code on your machine to even view the &amp;quot;website&amp;quot;. There will be no &amp;quot;browse w&amp;#x2F;o Javascript&amp;quot; option in that future.&lt;p&gt;The kind of jerks who liked adding Javascript to block right-clicking, blocking &amp;quot;Paste&amp;quot; into password fields, etc, are going to absolutely love using the browser-in-a-browser product to deliver their &amp;quot;website&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;For the inevitable replies: Yes-- you can already do this with minified Javascript. WASM, being targeted for performance, is just going to make this kind of asshattery faster.</text></item><item><author>6gvONxR4sf7o</author><text>Whatever you think about javascript, I love the historic separation between content and interactivity. I dislike that so many static pages won&amp;#x27;t load without JS and that we&amp;#x27;re moving further in that direction. I hope the evolution towards &amp;quot;browser as OS&amp;quot; doesn&amp;#x27;t hurt the content vs interactivity separation. Could we ever lose the HTML centered model?&lt;p&gt;That could mean we lose hackability and the ability to write extensions or even scrape the web without a BigCo webcrawler&amp;#x27;s level of infra investment. Is everything going to turn into an opaque single page app? Technically, webassembly is really cool, but I worry about where the browser is headed.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>IvanK_net</author><text>It makes no sense to me. You are saying, that instead a 5 kB webpage, you would load 50 MB code, which emulates a browser, just to show you the same webpage?&lt;p&gt;Every webpage pays for the traffic in some way, and everybody tries to save web traffic as much as possible (optimizing images, videos, minifying JS, CSS ...). It makes no sense to expect, that websites would turn the opposite way just for fun.&lt;p&gt;I would be very glad, if you can emulate a computer in a browser, so you can e.g. use VirtualBox or VMWare comfortably in your browser. Still, it will be sandboxed (it can not turn off your computer, or clear your hard drive, etc.).&lt;p&gt;I think the web is the most open, independent, secure and versatile platform today. And I hope it will become even better and more powerful in the future.</text></comment>

train

<story><title>The birth of Microsoft&apos;s new web rendering engine</title><url>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2015/02/26/a-break-from-the-past-the-birth-of-microsoft-s-new-web-rendering-engine.aspx</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>EdSharkey</author><text>YES! 1-2-3-4, I declare a browser war!&lt;p&gt;Finally. This is the Microsoft I&amp;#x27;ve been waiting for! No more rolling over and no defeatist talk of adopting WebKit or whatever. Microsoft is going to use its muscle and position to make a truly competitive browser.&lt;p&gt;We need more competition, and we need the default browser in Windows to be just as good as Chrome and Firefox.&lt;p&gt;Microsoft, I hope you pull every -ms- vendor flaggin&amp;#x27;, ring-0 kernel hookin&amp;#x27;, micro-optimizatin&amp;#x27;, site-specific D3D driver tweakin&amp;#x27; trick in the book as you reach for parity. This is going to be so fun to watch.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Throwaway90283</author><text>I&amp;#x27;d like to see some competition as well, but in my perspective, they&amp;#x27;re taking the wrong approach.&lt;p&gt;This entire project seems to be about improving compatibility with older websites, by adding more algorithms and layers to the rendering process. I don&amp;#x27;t believe everyone is using Firefox and Chrome because they have better compatibility than IE.&lt;p&gt;I think they should focus on cutting the fat, and making the lightest weight, fastest and standards compliant browser possible, with some popular third-party add-ons available, such as ad block. Or, leave IE11 as the default now for compatibility, and spin off a new browser called IE Lightning.&lt;p&gt;If people start to switch over, then more sites will be developed to work in IE Lightning.&lt;p&gt;In short, create a faster browser with a smaller memory footprint and ad block, get users, watch compatibility fix itself, then make this ship as the default browser in 5 years.</text></comment>

<story><title>The birth of Microsoft&apos;s new web rendering engine</title><url>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2015/02/26/a-break-from-the-past-the-birth-of-microsoft-s-new-web-rendering-engine.aspx</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>EdSharkey</author><text>YES! 1-2-3-4, I declare a browser war!&lt;p&gt;Finally. This is the Microsoft I&amp;#x27;ve been waiting for! No more rolling over and no defeatist talk of adopting WebKit or whatever. Microsoft is going to use its muscle and position to make a truly competitive browser.&lt;p&gt;We need more competition, and we need the default browser in Windows to be just as good as Chrome and Firefox.&lt;p&gt;Microsoft, I hope you pull every -ms- vendor flaggin&amp;#x27;, ring-0 kernel hookin&amp;#x27;, micro-optimizatin&amp;#x27;, site-specific D3D driver tweakin&amp;#x27; trick in the book as you reach for parity. This is going to be so fun to watch.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>melling</author><text>We have a already have lot of competition. In fact, it&amp;#x27;s never been better: Chrome, Firefox, WebKit, Chromium, Opera. You can even get the source code for Firefox and Chrome and contribute. I&amp;#x27;m glad Microsoft is making a better go at it, but honestly, Microsoft could have built a more compliant browser any time they wanted too.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https://html5test.com/results/desktop.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;html5test.com&amp;#x2F;results&amp;#x2F;desktop.html&lt;/a&gt;</text></comment>