skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In the UK they've sidestepped this concern by making the refusal to decrypt an imprisonable offence: https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investig...

Though of course it doesn't help if the owner of the device is unknown, as alluded to in the linked article.
For expressing it while not on the job, no, they should not be fired.
FUCKING SPOILER ALERT next time
That enthusiasm translates to a lot of very hard work, huge deployments and plenty of investment. What's wrong with enthusiasm?
There was another person doing SICP in Clojure too, but it's been frozen in chapter 2 for a couple of years now. https://github.com/ecmendenhall/sicpclojure

Hope this one gets to cover the whole book.
>It is not "their own product". It is the customer's. He has bought it.

It is still their "Product" though, yes, they no longer own it. My car is a product of General Motors. My computer is a product of Lenovo. My Phone is a product of LG. Even though all are owned by me.
Developers are afraid
Malice is not required. All they have to do is be wrong.
You'll be glad that someone got the IMAP reference... (Unless you're as niche as I, and were referring to ACAP).
Only the first part is ironic
Agreed and very much a case of using the letter of the law to abuse the spirit of the law and in this case, avoid it.

He has argued all along that if he left he would be whisked away for nefarious trials by America and if that was the case then this 5 year date of his hiding will make no difference. Unless he just wanted to avoid the trial for whatever reason.

Still for a trial you need a victim and in this case, that victim was not Assange and we have a trial and victim who will not see justice or any form of trial - fair or not. So can imagine how they feel about this.
Hear, hear! If the U.S. Government hadn't broken trust then none of this would be happening.

While I feel for these families, I don't think it's a fair trade-off to have the government snooping on us all the time for the sake of a bunch of scared old white people.
Disable WiFi-Sense completely on Windows 10
Show HN: JIF for Messenger (iOS)
Also really interesting: http://xuanji.appspot.com/isicp/
What bullshit.

> The homicide remains unsolved. The killer remains at large.

> Until very recently, this situation would not have occurred.

Until very recently, people weren't carrying smartphones, so the murders would remain even more unsolved. At least the phone is a perfect medium for fingerprints. And anyways, what were the police hoping to find? A photo of the murderer? A note saying which direction the killer run? Most "useful" information (messages, phone calls, location data) is available from the network operators anyways.
Worth quoting too:

> As they drank tea, he started to fondle her leg which she welcomed. Everything happened fast. Mr Assange ripped off her clothes and at the same time broke her necklace. She tried to put her clothes on again, but Mr Assange had immediately removed them again. She had thought that she did not really want to continue, but it was too late to tell Mr Assange to stop as she had consented so far. Accordingly she let Mr Assange take off all her clothes. Thereafter they laid down on the bed naked with AA on her back and Mr Assange on top. Mr Assange wanted to insert his penis into her vagina, but she did not want him to do that as he was not using a condom. She therefore squeezed her legs together in order to avoid him penetrating her. She tried to reach several times for a condom which Mr Assange had stopped her from doing by holding her arms and bending her legs open and trying to penetrate her with his penis without a condom.

> Indeed she was concerned he had not put a condom on. She felt his penis with her hand to check he had really put it on. She felt that the edge of the condom was in the right place on the root of his penis. They therefore continued to have sex, as she said that she thought that she just wanted to get it over with. After a while AA noticed that Mr Assange had pulled his penis out of her and started to arrange the condom. Judging by the sound AA thought he was removing the condom. He then penetrated her again and continued sexual intercourse.

> When she started to move her body she noticed something was seeping out of her vagina and understood it must be his semen. AA told the police she was convinced that Mr Assange, when he pulled out of her, broke the condom by the glans and then continued the intercourse until he ejaculated.

> Her statement then describes in some detail the conduct that forms the basis of Offence 4. She fell asleep, but was woken up by his penetration of her. She immediately asked if he was wearing anything. He answered to the effect that he was not. She felt it was too late and, as he was already inside her, she let him continue. She had never had unprotected sex. He then ejaculated inside her.

Not a "grey area of undesired sexual experience" here. Just straight up exceeding the scope of consent.

EDIT: downvoted by either the pro-rape crowd or the anti-copyright infringement crowd.
i wanted to write this!

+plus+

If iPhones are going to solve all the crime, what will the police be doing in the meantime? :)
>I find it more likely that the blog was (maybe still is) compromised.

That would be my thought too if it were someone else, but it's Oracle so it's most likely real.
It's actually incredibly simple, just rename the .crx to a .zip and load it as an unpacked extension.

https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/getstarted#unpacked
The NYT has long been an apologist for the police state.
I wondered about that as well, 3 billion squared is a massive number but we have processors in the billions of operations per second per core and machines with hundreds of thousands of processors.

I'm curious how fast we could do it on the raw 'string' in the worst case (assuming DNA is entirely random) but it's out of my scope, anyone hazard a guess?
What do you consider the better alternative? (serious question)
I may have done something wrong but I wasn't able to install the Windows Phone 8 development tools a couple of weeks ago (Win 7 x64, VS Ultimate 2013).
Mint is a great OS, I used it off and on for several years. I enjoy getting my hands dirty and I like fine-grained control over my OS though, so I've always gravitated back to Slackware long-term. Not to drag out the dreaded car-computer analogy, but it's why I keep my old 1982 farm truck instead of buying a more modern work truck; it's simple, I know it inside and out, and it runs just the way I want it to.

But you can't go wrong with Mint as a "get out of my way" OS, as you said.
Thanks, that's much worse than I recalled.
> Yes, it's your product, but this is my home!

My stance is that EULAs are bullshit, period. If you purchase a product, it is yours, and no one should be able to dictate how you use it.
> Would you rather they only print things you agree with?

No, I just don't want them printing things that are wrong ;-)
If Oracle won't sick the sales people on your upper managers if they even get wind that someone at the company want's to move away, you're just not a large enough customer and Oracle doesn't give a shit if you move.
Who's the author?
If you're going to make these arguments you need to allow that there are two sides to the argument. It's not that the other side is completely wrong.

The kinds of encryption being discussed go beyond the fourth amendment when it comes to reasonable searches and seizures. It's not an absolute right, and the kind of encryption we're talking about goes beyond any protections seen in the past (short of, perhaps, being able to physically store stuff in safety deposit boxes of banks in certain countries -- just as we might need to wait decades for encrypted data to be decrypted, it took decades for seekers of justice to access Nazi bank accounts).

On the other hand, we keep so much of our lives in our phones and computers (in a sense they are extensions of our minds). If we're going to make this argument, perhaps it should be more like the fifth amendment. After all, we may literally have our personal computers built into our bodies in the future, what rights would we have over the data in them?

There is some legal precedent for the fifth amendment argument -- whether personal diaries are protected is a subject of contention, and are not cell phone data stores very much like personal diaries?

Unlike the fourth amendment, the fifth amendment is pretty much absolute, so it's a stronger case.

The fourth amendment was not written with strong encryption in mind, just as the second amendment did not consider nuclear weapons. So far, even the NRA hasn't tried to argue that we have a second amendment right to tanks and nuclear weapons.
I could not agree more. Exactly my thoughts after having read the article!
The software is the good part of Oracle. You figure out the rest.
The bit about loathing Keynes at the end makes for comedy gold.
Sometimes running kills me, sometimes it's a bliss. My philosophy in physical activity: smooth waves. I start slow, push it very slow as long as I feel flowing[1]. I wave around the sweet spots.

BUT, I try not to control it too much, every time I start to focus about something else[2], I feel like flying. The minute I start thinking back about my body, the pleasure vanish.

My goal is to tighten my sensitivity to these two ideas so I can reach flow faster and longer.

[1] except min 5 and 15 where I often crack down a bit, maybe the body shifting sugar supplies.

[2] a rant, a fantasy, a job idea, some music...
If it's a legal requirement, they can just sue you for breach of contract whenever they eventually find out that you didn't delete it.
>ITT: things that will never happen.

That's the idea
Sorry Erbdex, I can't edit a parent post.
Agreed. Doesn't make it any less crap, but it's good to see the opinion of the other side. I can sympathize with the position, even if I disagree. Investigations are hard enough to conduct as it is without having a potential treasure trove of information locked away.

iMessage logs between users must be fairly hard to get. In yesteryear you could rely on SMS transcripts from the carriers.
Since Oracle has made it clear that they do not want to collaborate with third parties on their code, the most reasonable responses would be either 1) trust them and follow their agreement or 2) don't trust them and use a different solution (probably something open source or based on open source)
All of your invective was exactly what programmers were saying to XML proponents in the early days of XML. I still can't entirely tell if you're deliberately doing this or if you really are just wholly unaware of yourself.

> The notion that binary serialization is difficult comes from the most profoundly lazy evaluations possible, where the most minimal of up front understanding are effort are eschewed if you can just open a text file and insert some giant mystery meat bags of XML.

etc etc
Since when have suspected sexual offenders been the ones to set the rules on when and where they're interviewed?

Assange has played his supporters and the 'Sweden are going to extradite me to the US' line to avoid facing being questioned over his behaviour
London is huge, there's nowhere near total surveillance. There's an abundance of CCTV in many areas of central London, and throughout the tube network, but it's very patchy elsewhere in the city.
I thought Oracle was out of the - we care about money and nothing else - closet. Did I miss something?
You can set your iPhone to secure erase after 10 failed pass-code attempts.

In addition you can use long alphanumeric pass codes and even the default new passcode option is being increased to 6 digits (though you can choose a 4 digit option).

This renders the brute force option pretty useless. Which I'm fine with, I don't want to make things easier for crooks or identity thieves.
Here's another possibility: Google's taking a page from the Innovators Dilemma, and moving their disruptive projects away from corporate meddling. Most innovative projects die at big corps because they don't fit into the companies existing business model. Walling-off self driving cars and contact lenses from Google's core business could give it the room it needs to grow (before some VP of whatever cuts the project for not being profitable).
Even if we leave aside the specifics of the Assange case, I still find it astonishing as a general principle.
Biicode (just the company) post-mortem
lets wait, if Oracle does a DCMA on Archive.org

I guess some more people did screenshots, or pdf prints of that page, just for the case Oracle wants a Streisand Effect.
If there are factual inaccuracies, they should have an editor's note or something correcting that. (I expect they fact check op-eds as well and won't print one with outright falsehoods).
Is it illegal for a cab to refuse a fare in NYC?
Many large organizations log shell commands for audits. Those logs can be stored offsite by a third party to prevent alteration. See, for instance, the Goldman Sachs programmer arrested for stealing code. If the consulting group is professional, it will take these things seriously.
Why a Strong Brand Means Higher Growth and a Better Valuation for Your Startup
I consider full disk encryption to be a major feature of the phone (as I'm sure do many others). Part of me is glad to see people in government complaining about it because I'm assured that it works as intended.
Planet Money did a piece on one of the larger medallion holders, that had the same conclusions.

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/07/31/428157211/episo...
If you look back at the author's earlier blog posts you'll find similarly-minded thoughts: https://blogs.oracle.com/maryanndavidson/entry/mandated_thir...
Melies' film “A Trip to the Moon” being encoded into DNA
What Language Does Your App Speak?
Why put a tonn of whitespace between paragraphs if the text is so small and line spacing so narrow as to make my eyes force-evolve mouths just to let out a scream?
> I think I'd rather live in a world in which both sides of every issue get to have their say than in which the losing side is excluded if they're sufficiently "bad".

The problem with giving "both sides" of an issue equal time is that it can legitimize completely indefensible positions. Global warming is a prime example of this. Virtually every scientist who is familiar with the data is convinced that global warming is happening right now and that drastic action is needed in order to stave off catastrophe. Only a tiny minority disagree. For decades, people on both sides of the issue have been interviewed as though this is something that is genuinely controversial when the truth of the matter is that scientific consensus exists that global warming is real and is happening right now.

Full-disk encryption is one of the best ways to protect users from having their privacy invaded. Cell phones contain a wealth of personal information and can be the starting point for identity theft. The benefit to consumers...the vast majority of whom are lawful...outweighs the risk that law enforcement will be locked out of collecting potentially useful information in the course of an investigation.

To say that full-disk encryption stymies the finest law enforcement minds in the world is ridiculous. There are other ways to collect information. They can serve the cell phone company with a warrant in order to get calling records and text messages. If they can find the e-mail address associated with the user's device, they can serve Google & Apple with a warrant to access GPS data and e-mail correspondence.

I understand that it's a blow to law enforcement to have something like cell phones be suddenly off limits, but technology always enables people to commit crime in new ways. Eventually, the police always catch up.
[Webinar] – From $0 to $1B, Scaling Customer Success at Eloqua
If you're forced to use their software, and you disagree with their strong closed-source stance, you should share your views with whoever is doing the "forcing" (your employer?). If they don't listen, it's on them.

Oracle has a very specific, clear opinion on the matter and it is valid to have that opinion. I don't agree with them, but I respect that we're allowed to disagree. Instead of hating them, I just don't use any of their stuff if I can help it (except Java).

There's no need to be filled with hate over it. Change what you can change and don't worry about the rest.
I thought using Oracle anything was like a doctor prescribing an expensive new drug instead of the trusted, tested and generic version for a free game of golf and lunch for the office.
Not "prove". "Confirm". If you ask somebody to do something, they might do it, or they might not, whether out of passive malice or carelessness. Saying you have done something which you haven't done requires active malice, which is much less common.
Long story short, the article is weak because a sample of one means nothing.

The real reason why things are gonna be end-to-end encrypted from now on is because we can and there is nothing anyone can do about it. Technology > policy.
This is indistinguishable from the conspiracy theories people used to circulate about a magic carburetor design which got 85MPG and was killed by Detroit automakers for unknown reasons.

Just look at the chain of unsupported assertions which have to all come true for this to make any sense: Mozilla will prevent you from installing ad-blockers, and that this will bother enough users to matter but somehow that won't lead to enough volunteered developer time to maintain even an almost unmodified “fork” which changes only a build flag (or a signing key)?

Or that somehow if that proved popular enough to attract a large number of users they'd react not by reconsidering such policies but instead push everyone over to Edge/WebKit? Microsoft and Apple are not primarily advertising companies and at least Apple is marketing actively on the idea of respecting your privacy – it's hard to imagine anyone working at a browser vendor not realizing that such a move is simply going to push users to switch.
How would it be worse if only a very select number of companies / powers are going to space?

We won't be going to space to get to the local supermarket, so I am genuinely unsure how your analogy makes any sense.
From https://wiki.mozilla.org/Addons/Extension_Signing

"What are my options if I want to install unsigned extensions in Firefox?

The Developer Edition and Nightly versions of Firefox will have a setting to disable signature checks. There will also be special unbranded versions of Release and Beta that will have this setting, so that add-on developers can work on their add-ons without having to sign every build."
Wait. People still use Windows Server 2003?
Oracle is unbreakable, silly.
You're right -- it's the "square mile" in particular that's under massive surveillance. But that's "The City of London".

The point is that claiming the UK doesn't do mass surveillance is hilarious. They just haven't had a Snowden yet.
The City of London is different from the rest of London, complete with different police forces.
Somewhat related debate of law enforcement's needs vs user's need to privacy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZSr9Ao8zBY
> Reverse engineering software is completely different from penetration testing

How is it so? You cannot find funny vulnerabilities without reverse engineering the binaries.

> It doesn't make sense for it to be illegal to forbid reverse engineering in a license agreement, where is that the case?

France, Switzerland, Russia and many more.

> it would make more sense to just forbid closed source software

How did you make this leap from reverse engineering to closed vs. open source?

> If the code was open, you wouldn't need to reverse engineer it.

Even with the full source available you still have to analyse (read: reverse-engineer) the binaries, especially those widely shipped.

> rather than violating their agreement

Their agreement is void in many countries where reverse engineering is explicitly allowed (when done for the reasons of security and interoperability).
Doesn't this directly contradict the European "right to remain silent" [1]

[1]: Europe human rights court: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/1996/3.html#para45
building Firefox is not trivial

./mach bootstrap

./mach build
You might want to read it. :-) The problem has mostly been that nobody's come up with a better JSON representation than one in a April 1st XEP (and they have been proposed - as ralphm says, they're mostly XML-with-curly-brackets, which makes them have the disadvantages of both).

On the other hand, both stanza.io and XMPP-FTW both use the same fixed-format (ie, inextensible) JSON format for XMPP just fine. They can do this because they drop unknown namespaces and don't intend to provide round-trip conversions, etc. So if you're after a JSON "interface" to XMPP, there is one, and it's pretty good.

Worth a look.
UMass Amherst was this side of non-functional for the first three days of the school year in 2005 because of a botched Peoplesoft (at that time recently purchased by Oracle) rollout.

http://www.cio.com/article/2439102/enterprise-resource-plann...
According to this writeup, that may be worked around by resetting the device after every few attempts: http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=5106 (penultimate paragraph)
It's hard to be enthusiastic if you don't have a job that pays you enough and gives you enough free time in which to be enthusiastic. Enthusiasm is a luxury!

Even if people start out being enthusiastic when building open-source projects, they quickly lose the enthusiasm if when they are faced with an on-going choice between working for nothing and earning a living.

Most successful open-source software contributors have decently-paid jobs. The people who don't get paid enough are too busy struggling to earn a living to work for nothing on top of that.
More so when if this was TAX evasion then Sweden have no time limit, which is really putting how messed up this is into perspective.
Definitely, there are some valid points!
Assange is not setting the rules. The Ecuardorians set the rules for questioning in their embassy and the Swedish have no rules against questioning suspects abroad if necessary.
The two examples I think that matter are Amazon and Microsoft. I don't think they copied Google- I think they independently realized, when they decided to enter the cloud service, that they had to scale up and out their data centers tremendously. And when you do that, you quickly learn that deploying more hosts is easier than deploying the ports to interconnect those hosts with a globally nonblocking fabric.

Amazon and MSFT have both published nice papers showing that they "got it" about 3-5 years ago. I think they operate within an order of magnitude of Google in terms of total external and internal traffic, but that's just a guess because none of these companies publish enough detail to say for sure.
I once had a friend with which I fought almost all the time. We were miserable, the two of us. Eventually, he just dropped me (didn't return my calls, answer my emails, etc). I was very angry, but decided not to do anything about it. Over time, I came to respect his decision and even be grateful for it. I have no idea how he is doing. I tried to send him an email, but he didn't respond ;-) I'm very much happier without him in my life. I owe him a debt I can never repay. I hope he is similarly happy without me in his life.

If there is something that your friends are doing that causes you a problem, you can discuss that very reasonably without being angry. If it's something that really, truly deserves your anger, then it is probably best not to discuss it at all. There is no need to make everyone even worse off than they were before. Letting go of the situation that caused the anger is the first step in healing yourself. Don't bind yourself to it. Sometimes this means losing a friend, but in this case, wouldn't that be a potentially good solution?