skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The title is wrong. The patent is about how you place the tabs which are opened from already open one and a specific way of closing them. It definitely doesn't patent opening and closing in general. It's more about UI placement and the UX. From the patent itself: "Some browsers provide a tabbed interface. The FIREFOX 2 browser, available at http://www.mozilla.com/, is an example of a browser with a tabbed interface."

Edit: title was wrong (was about google patenting opening/closing tabs), now updated
It's containerization between trustworthy apps; it's not security containerization. What it gets you is, if you have one application that's designed to run well on RHEL 5 with /usr/bin/python pointing to Python 2.4, and another one that's designed to run well on Debian testing with a manual /usr/bin/python symlink to Python 3, you can give both of them what they want. This has nothing to do with security.

If you want Docker + security isolation, I'm intrigued by Clear Containers, which is a lightweight KVM-based virtualization thing:

https://lists.clearlinux.org/pipermail/dev/2015-September/00...

https://lwn.net/Articles/644675/
Your Westpac E-Statement Phishing Scam – MailShark
> Any errors reflect poorly on the contributors, and someone who spots a slip-up can talk to a real person about it—neither of which is true with Wikipedia.

Maybe I'm not understanding this statement properly, but Wikipedia has a history page and uses version control so all content can be blamed to someone. And there is also a talk page to bring up issues.
I wouldn't rule out it being more comprehensive. Given some small topic, it may be more likely that Wikipedia has an article on that particular subject, but it may be directly or indirectly covered in a subsection of some SEP article.
I spent a little time working on some smaller philosophy articles. No one is really watching.
So, kind of like JScript in IE3?
Cyberlink Power 2Go Platinum 10 Keygen plus serial key free
Big 5 publishers eBook sales have declined becuase of agency pricing. Overall eBook sales have not declined.
You just linked to the same line four times. :P
The "3-story barracks" you speak of - they're actually the most humane compromise we have. Something that is relatively cost-effective to throw up, but accommodates a decent number of people, and when built throughout a neighborhood will easily pass the critical thresholds for future services. Much of San Francisco is also built to 3 stories, and it's one of the most dense areas in the country. It's a geometry problem, as you point out - but also a cost problem. It's cheaper to have mid-rises everywhere than a few high rises, and people find shorter constructions more humane on average. But the construction height isn't the _only_ thing to worry about.

Land use in suburban areas is mostly premised on maximizing car traffic. That's why we have the big six-lane streets and the huge parking lots with sad, small strips of grass separating everything. If we optimize for maximizing people movement over car movement, the streets get smaller and so do the parking lots; transit and bikes get more accommodation. Room opens up for more destinations, and you get more access at a lower average speed and energy consumption, further improving the land value - all just by changing the design requirements. Traditional cities are very energy-efficient.
> He would know why. Though he may not understand the technical details of why."
He would know why they are getting better results. "Oh, we tweaked the firmware and now we're in compliance."

Yes, precisely my point. If he knew that they "tweaked the firmware" well there's a million ways to do that legally and to be in compliance. And there seem to be a few ways you can do it illegally too, and no be in compliance.

The claim he made was "He has said publicly that he is not aware of any wrong-doing on his part." And that's technically true! Hiring someone who punches another employee reflects poorly on you, but that doesn't make the punch your fault. So hiring someone who hired someone who hired someone who told a programmer to come up with a "cheat mode" hardly makes the CEO directly responsible. He is responsible through the chain of command, but not because of direct knowledge.

Finally, please remember that emissions are incredibly complex and it's entirely possible that someday someone will discover a way to get great mileage with low NOx emissions. Maybe it's pulsed injection, maybe it's having more fuel injectors, maybe it's even higher pressures, maybe it's who knows what. So just because you're getting numbers that are better than your competitors doesn't automatically mean that the people in your company must be cheating and that they need to be found out. It's entirely likely that they just did something clever!
what don't you like about jira?
There are plenty of ways in which people get simply harmed with no "benefit", or even crushed. By definition we only ever talk with those who survive in some way, and I think it's best to leave it up to a person to decide how they feel about bad things in their life, and what it did or didn't do for them. If you suffered through horrible things and grew from it with no permanent damage, that's great (no sarcasm intended), but please don't assume that's how it goes for everybody.
Apparently, no. Like I said, it's a pace car, a lure. I'll never catch it. I can't complete 10 of 15 impossible daily tasks and be satiated. It may just be my personality.
No, but that's when it reached critical mass, IMO.
A few days ago I was chit chatting with a young dev who works in a Node shop when he asked:

Young dev: "So, what's your backend?"

Me: "Django"

Young dev: "What?"

Me: "Django, a Python framework."

Young dev: "Oh, right, that old framework. It must suck to support a legacy app that's written in something so outdated."

Me: "Well, we kinda use Django for everything."

Young dev: "Wow, doesn't everyone just use JS these days?"

Btw, I'm 36.
> Just this past summer they did a piece about how air conditioning is sexist.

I wondered about that article and had a look:

http://www.theguardian.com/money/shortcuts/2015/aug/04/new-c...

If you read through the article, it's clearly a joke to them.

>25C it is, then. Fine, as long as you’re aware that means more men wearing shorts in the office during summer.
There was an interesting comment here about Kodak several months ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8978909
Identifying Neurons That Control Anxiety
This assumes that Docker containers are being used like VMs. They're not designed to allow running isolated arbitrary code in some sort of multi-tenancy setup, they're designed to isolate dependencies and configuration between your own deployed services. This is a "security vulnerability" in the same way that putting up a white picket fence around a jail is - a gross mis-application of a tool built for a completely different purpose.
The hydraulic ram / water hammer pump seems like a more elegant solution to me. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_ram
Any virtualization solution is going to require you manage an operating system. One of the goals of contanerization is for developers to only work with the application.
Most common and important java SE and java EE interview questions
And some folks don't want to sit in their chair with a sweaty arse all day.

What comes first, the bike commuters or a reasonable way to get clean at the end of a ride? I think the latter is pretty low on the list of priorities for a lot of companies, unfortunately.
Yes, just ask apple.
Glad to see the title has been changed. Previously it was yet another example of someone who has no idea how a patent works, but still feels qualified to get all outraged about them.
Think of it like a tool for packaging and deploying applications with everything they need. Its purpose is closer to package managers than being a secure sandbox for running untrusted users' VMs.
I completely agree. People should make sure to look at the claims, particularly under 1 at C:

"rendering, on the computing device, the tab management area such that a close button of a remaining tab is located at the screen position, wherein the rendering (b) comprises, when the tab management area was determined to be full in (b), translating the remaining tab to the left such that the remaining tab maintains the same width"

This is a patent on Chrome's mechanism for resizing the tabs after you move your mouse away from the tab bar, which is nicer than the standard method of resizing them while other tabs are still being closed. It's not a patent on opening and closing tabs in general.

Disclaimer: IANAL, but I have worked directly on patents.
Please don't take HN threads off on flamewar tangents, let alone religious ones.

We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10265114 and marked it off-topic.
Seems to vastly overestimate the chance of underdogs winning- for example it has Uruguay at a 20% chance to beat Australia, but on betting markets it is <1%.

Ditto Namibia is 10% chance to beat New Zealand, but it's around 0.1% on betting markets.
I've been wanting that. I'd plug a mouse and keyboard in too really, but my tablet (and apps) don't really allow for that.
They also don't have Kripke, Putnam or Fodor. I dare say that going by relative prestige in their philosophical cultures, Kripke is a more startling omission than any of the three you mentioned (http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2015/01/most-important...). That's not a point about merit, btw, just about who people would write about if personal articles showed favoritism.

I wonder if there's a tendency to not write articles on living philosophers (as opposed to some particular aspect of their work).

Still, I do suspect there is less work on 20th century Continental philosophy (so far as that's a well defined thing).
Software patents need to be banned entirely and this is a perfect example of why. Google's ideal outcome is that no other browser would have tabs, making them inferior to the point of not being usable. That is literally their desired outcome from filing this patent, and indeed it is the basis for every software patent. You can see just from the list of patents cited that Microsoft and many other companies have all taken out patents on obvious incremental design improvements on browser GUIs, and the reason that they do it is to gather ammo for some theoretical ultimate showdown that they imagine will end with their browser as the only remaining legal product. None of them are dealing in good faith, and this should confirm forever that Google no longer subscribes to "don't be evil" as a behavioral maxim.
KVM & VMWare are not containerization, they're full virtualization.

There are a lot of benefits to containers and they don't have to be insecure. More efficient resource utilization and orders of magnitude faster allocation and launching to name two.

Google runs a significant portion of its internal operations in a container infrastructure and has for quite a while.[1]

They're perfectly capable of deployment into production environments.

I won't comment on docker as I haven't spent the time to fully grok all its warts.

1. http://research.google.com/pubs/pub43438.html
Well, this is just the first alpha. Stable release may be much closer to January.
Part of it is also that announcing this sort of thing online doesn't do much unless it goes viral, and going viral seems to have a lot to do with random luck. There's so many horrible things happening in the world that it's difficult to pay attention to more than a few of them.
We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10267960 and marked it off-topic.
For that matter godaddy's website builder now "publishes" to a cassandra cluster that is served via a cluster of node servers with local redis as a local in-memory cache... it works really well. The distribution model is working much better than the previous publishing via ftp to a dedicated backend linux host (apache). I haven't been there for about a year now, but I'm pretty sure a lot of those aspects have proven out.
You refer to "the 1990s push to expand NATO to include Ukraine", what is that about?
Funny, an article got posted here just an hour ago advocating against treating Docker like a package manager: http://vilkeliskis.com/blog/2015/09/23/docker_is_not_a_packa...

I'd be inclined to agree. The reductionist sum of mechanisms that make a Linux container have always been about detaching, multiplexing and partitioning kernel resource subsystems. Docker was the first program that really hyped it into the idea of being about application deployment, but I fear this gives people wrong impressions and makes the mistake of treating an emergent property as if it were a fundamental.
There are three huge problems that e-books haven't solved, which has been holding them back.

First, consumer surplus. (Read this if you haven't: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckie...) Printed books use different editions and market availability to segment the market and bring in a significant amount of consumer surplus revenue. e-books have very weak mechanisms to capture consumer surplus, and that represents a huge potential loss of revenue. In theory it might be possible to make that up on the other end with higher volume (see, for example, steam sales and humble bundles) but so far e-book sales models have been too constrained to enable that to happen very often.

Second, commodity pricing. This is a big problem across the board in a lot of media (games, movies, music, etc.) but e-books have just doubled down on the same model. Books are not like dried beans, you don't just go to a store and buy books by the pound, but that's the model the industry has increasingly been rushing towards. With only popularity as the sole determinant of total revenue. This is a massively flawed model that hurts many talented writers and perverts the market in unhealthy ways.

Third, ownership. People with physical books can gift them to others, or sell them, or loan them. They can let their friends, their children, their other relatives, or their family's friends borrow them and read them. They are a profound asset of learning and shared culture. An e-book, however, is still by default a jealously guarded personal possession that cannot be easily loaned, sold, gifted, or inherited. Given the importance of books, this is a profound disadvantage of e-books.

Fourth, vendor lock-in. The average user experience with e-books represents a substantial dependency on a particular corporation (such as Amazon). If, say, Amazon went out of business it could be especially difficult to gain access to ones Amazon purchased e-books. Imagine, for example, some sort of world-wide disaster, and now there are no more new kindles, no more Amazon, etc. What happens when your one device storing all your books finally dies? This is similar to the ownership problem. Buying an e-book today is partly making a bet that the company that sold you that e-book will be around for as long as that book is relevant. Given the history of both corporations and of books, that's actually not a very smart bet.

e-books have a lot of short-term advantages but they have a lot of long-term disadvantages, at least as they exist today. That's not an intractable problem but it's one that so far the big powers in the e-book world have been deaf to hearing.
I enjoy the notes, though its definitely targeted specifically at software startups. How applicable would you say this course is to hardware?
There have been many 4chan spin-offs. 8chan is not the first or the last. If a google trends comparison means anything, it doesn't look like there's any fear about 4chan ever being surpassed soon.

>he responded to repeated questions about 8chan by talking about just about every other 'chan'-style site on the internet, making the omission very obvious, and indicating it was something he took personally.

Perhaps he didn't want to feed the trolls in his farewell.
You have completely ignored the actually interesting point of my argument, and focused on pointless details. In particular, my statement on affine types. Or, in C++ terms, move semantics by default, instead of copy semantics by default.

Raw pointers don't deep copy (what would that even mean?) so clearly you're only talking about structs that impose special semantics on raw pointers. If those structs were affine (assignment was a move which marked the old copy as unusable), then there would be no need to overload assignment for that facet of safety. They would just be in a different place, which would be fine.

The only really special case is having a pointer into yourself (really into yourself, not just into some fixed heap location you own -- basically, caring about your own location in memory). This is the only thing, as far as I can tell, that C++'s approach gains over affinity. Personally I consider it a bit of a nightmarish thing to do without GC (it's a bit nasty even with it TBH), but I know all too well that people will demand anything and everything; especially once they're used to it. Although this wouldn't completely preclude this pattern, it just means you can't wrap it up in a pseudo-safe way -- particularly if you want to pass it to arbitrary client code.

However this would be a massive break from C, which is copy semantics all the way down. I suppose C++ could have further given the `class` keyword meaning by making all classes affine. I dunno if people would have tolerated that kind of difference at the time. Sort of a soft breaking change, yaknow? Then again, maybe overloading `=` is already a breaking change in that regard.

shrug

language design is hard
Why did not they use Golang?
Personally, I'm not saying everyone must spend every minute resisting evil. I'm saying everyone is responsible for not actively encouraging evil, which is what Salesforce et. al. are doing. There's a difference between failing to volunteer at a rape crisis center vs. actually raping someone.*

*Obligatory internet disclaimer: This is a analogy.
What a waste of productivity.
Because while those IPs have been allocated it does not mean they're being currently used.

So, ARIN can't allocate any more to providers but many providers are not yet feeling the pinch yet so they're not passing the cost onto you.

Give it a time and you'll start seeing IPv4's coming at a premium and IPv6's being free.

edit

Also interesting, check out whose holding the /8's. [1] Some of them make sense like AT&T, but others don't...like MIT. Why's a university holding 224 ip addresses? Well, they just happen to be one of the first network holders. HP has 2 /8's which sounds pretty absurd (unless there's some reason I don't know that HP needs over 32 million ip addresses).
FCC is talking about the radio firmware blobs which drive the radio MCU/DSP chip. That is where you have the capability to drive the device out-of-spec. Not (necessarily) the Linux environment it is being driven from. This is a discrete, separate part to the main ARM or x86 CPU running Linux (though some SoCs are blurring those lines).

We already use firmware blobs on WiFi chips. It's why OpenWRT and friends are locked into old kernel versions for some routers: they don't have the source to the WiFi radio blob and can't recompile or reverse-engineer to make it work on newer kernels with different ABI. It's why we have a /lib/firmware directory for certain drivers in Linux: the device doesn't bother with flash memory, you have to load its firmware onto the device every power cycle into the DSP chip's memory.

So for many devices currently in existence, separate radio firmware is already how things are architected.

Some devices are flashed though, and don't require the host computer to load its own firmware, which is why I discussed a smaller EEPROM that would store signed config locking down the RF parameters and other aspects affecting certification.

Basically separate radio and OS firmware are how mobile phones currently work. That's why you see separate baseband versions from your OS version info in "about this phone": these new rules for SDR devices (separate to U-NII discussion here) will actually require a whole new FCC approval for each radio firmware change.

EDIT: And we haven't properly distinguished FCC approval process differences between modular WiFi transmitters (Eg. miniPCI-e cards) used in laptops and more expensive routers, which can self-contain and solve these issues by themselves without requiring the host device to care about U-NII security measures at all, versus cheaper/integrated products that may be crappy enough to require security measures in the main host device firmware in order to guarantee the radio firmware integrity to the FCC's satisfaction.
Then the system needs to reflect that. If it weren't for open source it would be impossible to compete with established proprietary software companies.

'Proprietary licenses' should expire and become open just like copyright is supposed to.
Making sense of your marketing data
Too bad Captioning is horribly broken on the Windows 8.1 RT Netflix client. It appears as though captions that are very close together just get dropped; if I rewind the correct amount, the caption will then display.

I encountered this watching subtitled shows, but tested out captioning and it appears to use the same broken system.
Vim and tmux
Thank you Moot.
The Internet’s Vanishing Point?
Palintir promised the government they could provide information awareness from unstructured sources. That is like telling one of the knights of the round table you know where the Grail is.
Wasting productivity may be necessary for society to sustain rapid population growth.
Excellent, will check it out, thanks.
Millions to be thrown into poverty as World Bank shifts threshold
Containerization and virtualization serve different purposes. VMs run actual operating systems within them. A single operating system runs many different containers, that each act something like processes running on that same OS, in a way where they're highly sandboxed and segmented from each other.

If your goal is strong isolation, then VMs are definitely better today. The purpose of Docker and similar container technologies is not that kind of isolation. It's to package up and distribute applications in a way that's more decoupled than simply installing them all on the same system.
Does anyone know the status in Android... And if there's an open bug for this?
You use this as an example to how Google no longer subscribes to "don't be evil".

At the same time how can Google protect its UI/UX if the patent system allows for cases like this? What if Microsoft or Apple went for the same patent and stopped Google from using it?
>Interestingly ol' Marx tried to differentiate between use and exchange.

Well, of course they're different.

It does seem that Neoclassical economics is fundamentally structured upon a series of misdirections that benefit capitalists:

* Blurring use and exchange value.
* The non-existence of money in neoclassical models.
* The non-existence of banks or other credit intermediaries in neoclassical models.
* Even the non-existence of profit in neoclassical models ("perfect competition")

Pretty much any kind of element of an economic model that could be used to analyze the source of profit, in fact, is just handwaved away under the heading "assumptions".
I wonder if it helps to liken OSS to infrastructure, and roads in particular. This because of how anyone can start a company that provides some kind of service using roads.
RePhone Kit – World's First Open Source and Modular Phone by Seeed
It is, but I imagined the portion from SF to SJ or even south SJ. Basically the SF SJ conglomeration along the el camino.
Awesome Penetration Testing: Collection of awesome penetration testing resources
That's not what first-to-file does.