skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"Deadlock is good" works in a system where the disagreeing sides are reasonable and willing to debate and compromise to produce a solution with broader support.

That is not the system we have: we have a fully-polarized system in which each major party's agenda consists primarily of ensuring that the maximum number of items from the other party's agenda to be enacted will be zero (I say "maximum", because rolling back or repealing any previously-enacted items is also an option). Since they're both quite good at the tactics, the result is inaction even in times when action is needed, to the detriment of the American people.
Club Herf: The startup business update
So then create shall-issue laws for concealed weapons nationwide and encourage ordinary, law abiding citizens to purchase and carry with them guns all the time. Also ensure that there are no exclusion zones, or else those become the prime target areas. If it is well documented that 1 in 5 Americans has a gun at any time, terrorists might think twice about their odds of success. Further, if they do carry out an attack, they won't be able to hurt many people before the people strike back.

If you want to put an immediate end to terrorist attacks the only way to do so is to ensure that there are people witnessing the unfolding events (so they know who are the good guys and who are the bad guys) and empower them to solve the problem right away. No matter how you slice it, you can't make 1 in 5 people permanent, paid police officers so you have to look at the citizenry. If you can't abide the idea of normal people carrying guns everywhere then you need to learn to live with the idea that the police can't be everywhere all the time, and that these are the risks you take regarding terrorism to feel safe from your fellow countrymen who you deem untrustworthy.
Already exists, but is completely unrelated.

It's not curl thats the problem, it's combination of download and execution in the "curl | sh -" pattern, which is not used in the article.
Windows vs. Mac: Do You Need Hyper Performance?
I've noticed this phenomenom too. I think mattresses is another good example. Is there a name for this?
Do you not see the sense of entitlement in that?

If the site has too many ads for your taste, simply don't visit that site. You have some sense that you are entitled to whatever efforts the site owner has committed to bring you content (obviously enough effort to be interesting to you) without supporting them through the ad service they chose. If you don't like their ads, you could simply move on, but now you're taking the fruits of their labor without giving them the passive support they ask in return.

I'm not saying its right or wrong, but the attitude of "they did what I don't like, so im going to do x" is very much entitled...
> What I don't like is the cultish behavior, and inherent bias that what I think is good is "universally" good.

I think people just have the desire for easy answers, that they have the one true answer and don't have to wrangle with the complexities of life.
What a nicely ambiguous title. You can read it as meaning happiness is not the truth in good relationships, and also as meaning happiness is about relationships.
PostgreSQL for MySQL Administrators
> I disagree completely. If corporations do not make a stand on surveillance and censorship then official demands are only going to get more brazen and receive less public attention and scrutiny.

You're describing a world where corporations represent you, the consumer. But you're not a constituent of the corporation, you're a resource. Corporations want to keep you happy in the same way that dairy farmers want to keep cows happy, so they'll keep on producing money or milk. The constituents are shareholders.

The ones representing your interests are the elected parts of the government. Which, I know, is laughable in the US. But still, corporations are not it.

Your comments on open source and consumer counter pressure describe something hopeful.
But it's really quite hard to make using a one-time pad illegal, and even harder to make maths illegal, so practically, while they could install all the backdoors in the world, they would struggle, practically, to prevent people ever encrypting anything.
I would love to understand that too. Especially since it seems to be a kind of UK problem. Colleagues in the US do have FF on their computers.

I'm not even allowed to run FF, Chrome, etc. We bypass this by using Waterfox because it seems to be the .exe Files that are blocked.

It's a horrible risk since people are doing research on their IE going down to private peoples pages and blogs (not all of them though since wordpress-hosted blogs are blocked...).
Apple vs Google vs Facebook and the slow death of the web
I'll only believe these "we stopped x number of attacks" quips when that number is given to us by an independent authority who doesn't have a vested interest in making numbers up.

Call me cynical - but I think recent history backs up that position.
Why Montana and Wyoming haven't accepted any refugees in years
Especially innovations in shower rooms where criminals can communicate without authorities interference. I think every shower room should have a backdoor in form of a chair for an agent to sit and listen.
Because incorrect location dots are so frequent here that every_single_time you order an Uber, the driver will phone you and ask you where you are (e.g. cross streets, landmark, ...).

If you don't speak Chinese, then you're going to have a hard time replying.
7 tips on how to become a full stack developer
Video screen interview candidates for free
That's not exactly the point of this paper (and the quote above is not in it?)

> these two types [of interpretations] are so radically
different that there must be experiments that, when analyzed outside the framework of quantum theory, lead
to different empirically testable predictions
The catch is that it doesn't, they just think it would.
The problem here is that tor is largely focused on realtime communications, and stuffing packets through e.g. facebook chat would probably be too slow. It would work great for another anonymity network that was more message-focused with no realtime needs.

That said, you might be interested in tor's meek pluggable transport:
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/meek

Essentially, the idea is that someone buys a VPS hosted on a cloud service with common ingress IPs (such as Google App Engine, Microsoft Azure, etc). Tor clients then connect to it, sending an innocent-looking domain (gmail.com or something) in the TLS SNI header, and then only in the datastream protected by TLS do they expose the tor protocol.

This is of course useless against NSA and GCHQ, which have access to all these cloud providers, but it's very useful for example for people behind restrictive country-level firewalls as the authorities are reluctant to block such large services and it's hard for them to distinguish this from normal traffic.
TLS wouldn't help; the greatest risk is the author himself sending a malicious script (no offense, Sergii).

So everyone needs to check the script before running it anyway. Which is easy, because it's a very short script.

(Of course, it's so short that it might as well have been an alias or, even better, just a copy-pasteable git command, but I guess the author really wanted to call it 'git punish'.)
Flatabulous – Best Flat Theme for Ubuntu Linux
They both came from the earlier `cvs annotate` command. annotate is the original name (from 1996). While it was common to talk about cvs annotate as 'blame', I think it first became the name of a command in subversion 0.32.0 (~2003, rcs blame was ~2004, cvs annotate grew the blame alias ~2008)
Hi guys!

Sorry for the shameless plug, however I would like to introduce you to Flatabulous, a theme I have been working on for Ubuntu Linux. I am using the Ultra Flat Icons for it, and it looks pretty rad to me, kindly check it out, and if you like it, drop a few stars on GitHub. If you find any issues, kindly use the issue tracker, and let me know. Feedback is greatly appreciated :)

Installation instructions can be found at https://blog.anmoljagetia.me/flatabulous-ubuntu-theme/
s/blame/praise :0

In the end only one's own gene-survival matters.
> half of US mobile and tablet usage

the point is SPECIFICALLY about 'desktop+tablet+mobile' market share. not among mobile alone, because ad revenue is not factored on mobile views only as well.

you need to select the all browser from the dropdown.
Back in the early internet era, the best content was available for free of charge. If anything, that's still the case even today. Try to google on some technical topics like Ohm's law or something and you'll find very old websites built with good ole' HTML tables providing the information you need crisp and clear.

Actually, I disagree. This is 2015. If I want to start a website on a certain topic, say about cars or electronics, I can find some really good free hosts who will support me without any sneazy catches. As a real example, I go to blogger.com, setup a new blog with my own custom theme, (with all the attribution to blogger removed if I want to) and start producing content. Not cool with blogspot? Then, how about Github pages? Not so technical? How about using a free shared web host (there are plenty, Google them)?

If your objective is to spread information and knowledge, you will do that no matter what. It is when your objective is guised as spreading information when you really want to make money and scale up doing so, then you run into a problem. The problem with this kind of appeal against ad-blocking is the same old argument of "How much is too much?"

"We need money to support our website to keep it up and running". But, never do these authors disclose how much they really need as long as they're making a killer profit.

The problem with mixing ads with content is that introduces a conflict of interest - Are you writing that content because you like writing, or are you writing that content to get more eyeballs to serve your advertisers? And it's very hard to convince your readers that you don't intend to make money from them although you have ads on your site.

For your reference, I do own a blog myself without any ads whatsoever and I think this is the future we're heading towards. I am a proud user of adblock software and I refused to be shamed for that. As would any user, I am concerned about the content first, which is the logical reason why I go to a site. But, if the site tries hard to ruin my experience to make it difficult for me to consume that content, then of course, I'll find a way to circumvent it. But, that doesn't mean I don't support the authors of the site, just that as everyone else, I have my own way of supporting them. Just like how I've been donating to Wikipedia all these years.

There have been too many sites abusing the slogan of "We need to place ads so we can support ads" to buy back our lost trust. Sure, there will be a lot of content weeded out because they can't support themselves, but I am confident that the ones whose objectives are to spread information will do so no matter what.

We built the internet ourselves when no one gave us ads to support our efforts back then. And we'll find a way to do it again. Just takes time and patience.
Knuth–Morris–Pratt algorithm's logic in 123 characters in JS
The thing about that hoax, is that they put together a massive PR and ad campaign, with billboards and other media ads. That's not quite the same as doing everything for a couple hundred bucks.
Uber Punch-up at City Hall after Mayor calls taxi drivers “luddites”
This works really great on Android Chrome, it is pretty close to an app experience (not being 60fps is the biggest giveaway). Speaking of Android, FYI the Orientation API is available, so you can lock to landscape and avoid that Portrait interstitial. `screen.orientation.lock('landscape')` at the time of this writing :)
"Your premise that drivers need to speak English is incorrect."

Next time you have non-Chinese-speaking friends visiting you in China, have them try to get around using Ubers, without your help. I'd be very surprised if their successful journeys (picked up and dropped off in correct places) are more than 50% of the total.

With a taxi hailed in the street, you just need the destination address on a business card or piece of paper. With Uber, it was often a challenge for them to find you to pick you up, before they started calling every time.
Anroid performance optimization videos,tutorials,and tools
You're comparing privacy invading, intrusive, battery draining, data chewing ad-networks, with a developer who asks you to pay a couple of bucks for something he's probably spent a month minimum developing.

Sorry, but no.

Those publishers have the option of asking their readers to pay for the content directly, which is exactly what the developer does.

They also have the option to use ad networks that aren't completely user-hostile.
Testing Google Cloud Platform CDN Interconnect with CloudFlare on ProbeAPI
>These “mood bots,” once ingested, will travel directly to specific areas of the brain, flip on genes, and manually turn up or down our happiness set point, coloring the way we experience circumstances around us.

One thinks of Brave New World.
IMHO, I just like the change. Embrace it, You'll survive.
Have you tried sovereign ( https://github.com/sovereign/sovereign )? For someone who knows a bit about Linux, it's a snap to install and get running.
GDP ~$1500/ Extended Family of 500-1000 members inhabiting a whole suburb....

It's interesting how those two types of things often go together.
The theory of six degrees of separation
I'm not exactly sure what your asking, but basically randomness in returns decreases as you increase the sampling rate (i.e. annual returns are more normal than say minutely returns). This is due basically to the fact that the more activity happens between measurements. (I could be misunderstanding your question.) High frequency measurements of prices often exhibit regularities that result from the trading mechanism e.g. bid-ask bounce.
How many people don't like money and power? We tend to highlight these aspects of any career (even if there are other negative aspects that far outweigh the benefits). "Get rich quick" schemes are always popular.
> In my experience, 8 hours of face-to-face overlap actually makes me significantly less productive due to distractions.

In my own experience, those distractions are mostly due to open-plan and cubicle-farm offices. Given a proper one-man office, with a door, it's very easy to be productive.
That's been the case for decades. When I used to get the Sunday paper half of it would go straight to the trash before I poured my coffee.
I think that is quite a negative response to a benign comment. Your response sums up why I don't share it often - I simply do not wish to preach.

I also think you have assumed a bit too much about me and how I treat other people. I said I don't share it. That does not mean I have tried and failed. I have shared my experiences with close family members. I have never preached and never will.

The emotional connection and understanding connected to these ideas are exactly what makes them important. To dismiss emotional insights as unimportant is to make emotion a second-class citizen in a world that is actually driven in a big way by emotion.

For example, the phrase "the dog is running across the main road" is a trivial fact when you see a dog run across a main road. If you're the owner, the emotions are what differentiate it from mere triviality. For the owner, the panic of their dog running across a road off leash is not emotionally trivial.

Back to my comment, I merely stated that the emotional value of these ideas is hard to convey without such experiences.

I'd beg to differ about the abilities enabled by my experiences. For one, I can relate to them ok an emotional level, which I cannot have done before. Second, it is clear to me that this particular journey has encouraged exploration and insight into my thoughts and emotions on a deep level. Before hand, I would not have bothered.

Could I have achieved this with a different set of experiences? It's probably. Does that discount the emotional value of those experiences to me? No.

What you are doing is trying to discount the emotional value I place on my own experiences, which is all I have talked about plus the difficulty of discussing the emotional insights from my experiences with those who haven't had them. There isn't really anything to object there.
Why? Because they command respect from others, which is one of the prerequisite for becoming a mobster in the first place.
Ember.js 2.0 tutorial for absolute beginners (draft)
rdl tried that with HavenCo/SeaLand but it was unsuccessful, largely, I believe, due to corrupt/incompetent "government" influence.

Even if you locate your server farm outwith unfriendly jurisdiction, you still need to connect it to the rest of the world, and it's difficult to do that without engaging the services of a company that is susceptible to influence by an unfriendly government. You're also susceptible to being effectively (if not literally) sanctioned via the financial system.

Sidestepping jurisdictional issues altogether by operating entirely virtually is a better bet right now (c.f. ASICminer).
> "Deadlock is good" works in a system where the disagreeing sides are reasonable and willing to debate and compromise to produce a solution with broader support.

This is not correct. Sometimes inaction is much better than action. In the case of a corrupt government, inaction is always preferable.

The US constitution is built to create deadlock. See checks/balances. It is this deadlock that has lead to American prosperity. While it is unable to do good, it is also unable to do harm.
if Apple allows blocking of ads on the web, it should allow blocking of ads on native apps also...
Suggesting that a site agree to have either one or no ads seems a bit to comand-and-control for the Internet.

I agree with the other commenter that it seems reasonable for asightto a sight to block content if their ads are blocked, but do not see this as a sustainable solution. How can one know abead of time whether a site will or will not behave this way. The only time you'd know is if re-visiting. In that case, you're not likely to revisit. Seems like a lose-lose.

To me, the obvious answer is the option to opt out and either immediately paying a metered amount cash exchange, paying an end of month pro-rata subscription amount, or paying via a block exchange.

I think the end of month subscription, divied pro-rata, is the best option (anonymized of course). Its transaction cost is the middle of the two. It requires no direct relationship with the site prior to your visit. But most importantly, it allows for Spotify style consumer pricing. The consumer pays a flat fee for opting out of adverts. Then the content creators are encouraged to produce content that you will actually spend time with, not click-bait. This leaves the option on the table for each site to sell other content and material behind pay walls.

One last comment. Advertising is designed to influence and change behavior and opinions. In my opinion it is disingenuous to insist that a site visitor agrees to third party influence brokering to keep your lights on. It is my screen, my hardware, and my mind. I have every right to run adblocker. Similarly you have every right to decide bow to keep the lights on at your business. But I think there as been enough of this argument that consumers have unwittingly entered into some sort of relationship /agreement and should somehow wake-up and see that it's our proper responsibility to be good advert targets so the servers stay on.
It probably caused violence because they tried to fight it.
I don't get what people have against utility theory (if that's what you mean by utilitarianism). For me it's one of the few models that must be obeyed: there must be a way to create a partial order among possible choices.

Whatever the reasoning behind your actions is, you are going to choose a single action (at each step) -- this forces you to choose the best. That's all utilitarianism is for me -- it tells you nothing about how to construct the utility function. Now the utility this view provides is just that: you can see clearly what sorts of thing you give greater priority, so you'll make the best possible judgement.
I doubt they're that bothered about people using one-time pads on paper. I think they're bothered about encryption becoming sufficiently normal that the stuff they want to see is indistinguishable from cat photos. There are measures they can take (legislative and otherwise) to prevent that scenario happening.
It's worse than that. It's anything else

> "It's in nobody's interests that anything should be able to [...] communicate out of the reach of authorities."

Forcing encryption backdoors compromises systems that do nothing but talk to systems. How'd you feel about a smart grid now that has knowingly insecure crypto.
This is what it looked like originally.

http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/07/d3/de/df/h...

I can't say I'm overly impressed.
The first I'd heard of DDC was here, so I might misunderstand some parts of the concept. But Wheeler seems to state it pretty plainly in this summary:

> In the DDC technique, source code is compiled twice: once with a second (trusted) compiler (using the source code of the compiler’s parent), and then the compiler source code is compiled using the result of the first compilation. If the result is bit-for-bit identical with the untrusted executable, then the source code accurately represents the executable.

I'd speculate that you need at least one of the compilers to be trusted otherwise they could both be subverted to produce X, Y that would produce matching V, W binaries with the attack still in place on both.
Dave McClure of 500 Startups talks business and strategy
React.js by Example: Interacting with the DOM
Initially seen only peripherally, I thought that middle picture was a photo next to a surrealist version of the same photo. I wonder if that was intentional.
> > "Sure, but I do expect that folks on my teams are spending about ⅓ of their lives—or 8 hours/day—working." "Those who produce more quality features over less time are more valuable than those who produce fewer, more broken features over more time."

> These two sentences directly contradict one another.

Nope, not at all.

> If an employee is working 4 hour days and accomplishing more than their peers working 8 hour days, why do you expect them to spend 8 hours a day working—especially when you yourself have already said the former is more valuable?

Because time marches on, whether or not someone is working. The whole reason I want someone who's productive in a shorter amount of time is that once he's done producing one thing he can get started on something else.
I feel like in the case of an adblocker, there's precedent for that to be free. They're freely available -and- more powerful on the desktop, so why should anyone pay for a less powerful, but still useful version on their phone/tablet? That's just silly
The Idea of Starting an Open Sourced Hedge Fund
I can't tell if your post is sarcastic or not. If you cannot prevent terrorist acts on your soil, the solution is pretty obvious then, it's not to give weapons to everybody or to hire 20% of your population as cop, it's just to be sure that you're not giving reasons to anybody to come and bomb you.

That's the only realistic & cost-efficient approach given the threat model.