skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Many people on Wall Street felt that Bharara’s crusade against insider trading was recklessly broad: An analyst like Horvath might knowingly obtain an illegal tip, but if he feeds his information up the chain to a Steinberg or a Cohen, and they take his word that he is not passing along stolen goods, should they really go to prison for that misplaced faith? Is it fair to convict someone of engaging in insider trading if he didn’t know he was doing so at the time?

This quote is interesting. I know that in some countries (including my own,) dealing in stolen goods is in fact illegal, regardless of whether or not you knew the goods were stolen in the first place. The onus lies on the buyer of the goods to remove doubts of where the goods came from, which often amounts to simply asking the reseller for a receipt. If you're given one which is bogus, you can claim ignorance and whoever you bought it from would be guilty of fraud as well as dealing in stolen goods.

Now, I don't know what the law says about dealing in stolen physical goods in the US, but if it's anything like the above then why should illegally obtained information be any different? Shouldn't it be reasonable then to ask whoever is dealing in this information to ask for a receipt, as it were?
I suspect that rather than paywalls, we'll start to see a lot more "native" advertising, where some or all of the content itself is an ad.
Your post seems entirely based on the assumption that people will not create and host quality content for free.
The world did fine prior to the advertisements and the world will be fine after the advertisements fail. Simply because somebody asks you to become a sheeple doesn't mean you are required to become one. No need to fall into lock step and comply.
Yeah, nothing about IRC is intrinsically difficult. There's some things that are much easier on Slack, like archive search, but how many people actually use that?

If you tell people something is hard to use, they'll believe you. If you tell them how to use something, they'll use it...
I'm responsible for a medium to large FOSS project. I noticed that Wordpress had recently moved to Slack, and asked someone I knew over there how engagement had changed after the move.

He reported they saw about a 10x increase in users moving to Slack (100 -> 1,000). (https://twitter.com/HypertextRanch/status/627122747664113664)

I get the arguments about not using it, but my priority is providing the best tools to the community to enable them to work together productively, as well as providing the most effective forum to encourage more people to get involved. How can I ignore that sort of order of magnitude increase in the number of people who can engage in real-time with the project?
None of the problems listed seem like problems to me. All of the solutions that make IRC fill this role seem like they will require more work and time to set up than I am to put in just to get communication set up. Slack just works. So unless I am going to be working on something highly sensitive that I can't trust a third party reading about, I'm going to keep using it.

Wouldn't the best solution be to adapt one of the existing open source slack clients to use a local server? Then we have all of the feature set and none of the security and privacy concerns.
The individual.
I disagree with some of the things in this article (mainly that IRC is necessarily better for your company) but Slack isn't ideal for FOSS projects. It's a very long way from ideal.

Main reason being: Slack is a company and as such they can change their policy at any time. There isn't any specific right granting FOSS projects any status. Slack can ban the users they want, can deny access to accounts they want, they can be sold to other companies and can be bankrupted, bring it all crashing down.

Slack isn't a tool, it's a service. It's not in any way whatsoever like a debugger or IDE, even if those may be closed source. A tool is something you have and can use. You might not own its manufacturing but you own its potential use. Like a hammer you didn't make but is yours to do anything with. You can use it a million times if you want.

Slack is someone else's hammer that you pay to use. That's a service. The fact that they allowed you to use it for free for some undefined period of time doesn't mean you own it or dictate any rule of its use. It's still their hammer. They can stop you from using it at any point in time.

FOSS projects are supposed to be inclusive, open, transparent and fully decided by an owner or a community. Giving away control to a third party with no contract whatsoever is a terrible idea and a good way to break many of those premises.

Slack is being used for FOSS because of the failings of IRC noted by others in this thread, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea. Certainly not when the audience for Open Source is already very accustomed to IRC.

Slack is great for the turnkey solution it is, it offloads that IRC configuration you'd have to do, and it's easier to introduce non-technical people to. It's good for paying customers that have a clear contract with the company and as such gain certain rights. It's not, in any way, ideal for other cases. It might fit them, but it's not a great idea.
Not really. ask.fm is a random ask and answer but ama-live.com has different rooms to ask different people and have ama sessions for an hour or so. Reddit - I use it a lot but I think its much of a discussion board, its not meant for AMAs in particular. Too much nested commenting creates noise and its usage is not simple. Plus the discussion is controlled by moderators of the subreddit which is not a good way of doing an AMA. My two cents.
Which ad blockers provide for that header being sent? I've never seen it before and I can't find any information on it. Did you just make it up?
Thanks for linking that. Perhaps I should have been more clear.

While some of the things done to Guantanamo detainees qualify as "torture" under the UN definition (e.g. waterboarding), I can imagine a smart and determined psychiatrist working around that definition of torture and yet leaving a person in a psychological state which makes clear the immense immorality of their work.

In other words, there exists a set of "enhanced interrogations" that are not technically torture (in the way that waterboarding is), but that are still morally abhorrent and would likely be prohibited if revealed.
> Not quite sure precisely what you're trying to describe with the 'as a Service' thing here.

The long-term idea is to have Windows delivered as a service like, say, a Chromebook. Or Gmail.

> you mention specifically SP2 - so obviously a part of a previous 'continuous mostly small update' process

Except it wasn't. SP2 involved a massive rewrite and was a significant upgrade. It could almost have been shipped as a new version of the OS, though it would have been somewhat unfair to charge for delivering what XP buyers should have had in the first place.

Anyway, XP SP2 was and still is worse than Vista SP1 or Windows 7 in all sorts of important ways. Sure, people could still use it (some are), but you could say the same about DOS 3.3. It just depends how many years of innovation and improvement you want to do without.

> And if an operating system's success depends on knowing where I am, it's doing something wrong (all my other operating systems, current, and historic, have been successfully used by me without access to these data).

It's one of the things that today's internet-aware mobile operating systems like to know. It's obviously more important when Windows 10 is running on a phone or a small tablet. It's generally not important on a desktop, but almost the whole web is using geolocation and cookies to track your location anyway, whether you like it or not.

> And, really, it should not be funding / driving development the same way some service providers acquire personal data and then market it on your behalf.

Location isn't driving development, but anonymized telemetry is. Indeed, it has done for some time, even if it was just feedback from Windows Update, or the rises/falls of popularity of certain software.

It has nothing to do with "marketing personal data". In fact, unlike Google, Microsoft doesn't even sell ads against the contents of your online emails.
I agree that is what the parent is talking about, however in the context of GCE, Google Cloud Services which include App Engine and a whole slew of other services are relevant. Given that if you've used them, there are integrations and even shared admin areas/dependencies, it is very relevant to talk about how other services perform in the Google Cloud.
The issue here is not that Livecoding.tv isn't removing this individual's account, but that individuals sign up for things with the expectation they have rights to their data. Here's a gem from Livecoding.tv's TOS which clearly indicates their intent with other people's data:

> All Materials contained on the Livecoding.tv Service are the proprietary property of Livecoding.tv or its subsidiaries or affiliated companies and/or third-party licensors. All trademarks, service marks, and trade names are proprietary to Livecoding.tv or its affiliates and/or third-party licensors. Livecoding.tv reserves all rights not expressly granted in these Terms of Service.
Unless otherwise expressly stated in writing by Livecoding.tv, you are granted a limited, non-sublicensable license (i.e. a personal and limited right) to access and use the Livecoding.tv Service for your personal or internal business use only.

In short, if you sign up for an account on their site, they own EVERYTHING. They don't have to delete your account because all of their users agreed to these terms by using the site. Looking through the TOS, there is nothing mentioned about canceling accounts.

I'm empathetic to the author of the article, but I will point out that expecting ownership of your content after giving up ownership of your content is logically unsound.

Shaming aside, not signing up for a centralized service with limited rights like this in the first place would have resulted in less suffering for everyone involved.
Hey, we fixed it. Now you no longer need to login to see. You will have to if you want to post any content. checkout ama-live.com
Yes---you're absolutely right. Thinking back, I have run into similar problems with the os x server apache implementation, where (a) anything slightly non-standard is not possible from Apple's GUI interface, but (b) editing config files by hand works UNTIL an update wipes it all away, etc.
Insider trading does harm people, and does reduce liquidity. Many people who understand classical economics get this wrong [0], because financial markets are a very degenerate kind of market from the point of view of classical economics.

The fundamental error in all cases is to conceptualize insider trading as buying from someone who would have bought/sold anyway. This is precisely failing to think at the margin. It is as erroneous as saying "eating meat is ok because those cows would have been killed anyway". Put more technically, when you buy a share, you do so by shifting up the demand curve a tiny bit, with your demand, which in turn shifts the price slightly up and causes a seller to sell, who would not otherwise have. Market microstructure, together with the fact that supply/demand curves really form a single curve, can obscure this fundamental economic fact.

Given this, insider trading does cause harm to some people. And how could it not? If a person can make money from insider trading, then, to first order, someone else must lose money. There are some externalities from information revelation, but only a tiny fraction of these benefits go to the marginal buyer/seller who lost out because of insider trading.

How does this compare to public releases of information? Well unlike insider trading, public information can shift prices without any transactions occurring (or in practice, very few). This is because while insider trading only moves the price by the mechanism of moving the supply/demand curve, while public information is revealed to all traders at once.

So while insider trading does reveal information (which is a good thing) it does so in a way that reduces liquidity, because people don't want to be on the wrong side of insider trading.

I'll admit that the above narrative isn't watertight. I think it's the best analysis that can be done verbally. The only models that allow a meaningful discussion of welfare in the context of financial markets are so called noise-trader models, which explicitly model the (irrational) reasons why most people trade. The whole field is vastly complicated by the fact that theory predicts almost no trade in stocks if people were completely rational.

[0] http://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-insider-trading-should-...
Hey we removed the login now. You'll have to however login if you want to post content, checkout ama-live.com !
Labful ideas: https://twitter.com/LabfulHQ
We removed the login, however you'll have to if you want to post content.
Perhaps frowned on, but not illegal in MA IIRC.
Oligarchy (Wikipedia)
You appear very knowledgeable about the plane but I counter the above with a pentagon report that summarily states (second paragraph) the F-35 circa July 2015 is falling short and it is not operationally effective for military combat. The following paragraphs thereafter contain a "shopping list" of mods the F-35 would need to have to be combat effective.

http://www.pogoarchives.org/straus/2015-9-1-DoD-FOIA-ocr.pdf

The plane's 400-billion cost is too extravagant and to bring up a point that the 'War is Boring' article made when comparing the inexpensive, 4-speed, Sherman tank versus the Porsche-engine equipped Tiger tank in World War 2, the Tiger was outnumbered by a preponderance of force that was more manageable.

An "outdated" F-18e (still in use) can defeat an F-35 in a dog fight and costs about half or $55-million each. (An F35 $100-million-plus) In my opinion the F-18 would be more valuable and effective in regional conflict than an F-35. YMMV
I'm about to start the assignment for the 5th week of Machine Learning on Coursera https://www.coursera.org/learn/machine-learning
Twitch.tv is using IRC in their main line of business (their chat).
It seems to work fine for them and it is easy to write custom bots etc for it as it is based on an open protocol.
Ha! Ok, this one makes sense. Thanks!
UML. Technically this is for a master's, but that's my spare time. I do find it interesting to see why it's not really used. So verbose, but not detailed enough for great communication.
Healthcare ends up costing a lot more becuase it is not state run in the US, and there are middlemen to pay.
I've been doing the http://open.kattis.com/ problems in Go.
If you're using stuff like the IoT Hub by MS, you can't use encryption other than HTTPS, and even if you could, deploying a secure encryption solution to IoT devices is a nightmare.
The world where only the big players can win is the one we live in now. It's difficult for a small player to be heard when Buzzfeed-type click-bate headlines dominate the landscape. Switch it around, who would pay for access to Buzzfeed? On the other hand, I would pay for an expert's opinion on a topic I'm passionate about. You only need 1,000 people paying $10 a month to make a good living. To get $120k from ads, you'll need a whole lot of visitors.
What does "if he's going to stray from the South Asian beat" refer to?
If IRC were good enough to handle the needs of small software company communication, people would use IRC. Sitting here pretending everyone just doesn't know about a 20+ year old technology is comical.

The "IRC Features" section bugs me, too. Unless you run a private IRC server IRC has a long, tortured history of design-based security difficulties. Gone are the days of netsplits permanently owning channels, but the so called "distributed" design of IRC makes it very brittle and easy to deny service.

Oh, and did you know that with modest, low volume channels (>200 <1000, some networks tolerate more) you can make IRC networks struggle? Turns out that their lousy distributed design hurts more than helps when single channels get heavy.

Slack also offers a logging service that, for what it's worth, is configured correctly and secured by default. For organizations with 1-3 technical staff, maintaining and securing a reasonable approximation of Slack's feature is probably time better spent working on your product.

IRC is a classic example of the "it's broke but we don't fix it because it's familiar" mentality of old school services. While it may be a good choice for running low-volume (<500 users) public communication. Most tooling around it is woefully inadequate and often tedious to use for small software-oriented teams where Slack thrives.

But if you're genuinely concerned about security, HipChat will sell you a whitelabel product you can host and monitor and its setup is quite good for what it is.
This article must have been paid for by the Evanston Chamber of Commerce.

There's no part of Evanston that is more than a 45 minute walk from Chicago, and it's been serviced by CTA (Chicago Transit Authority) buses and trains, PACE (Suburban Chicago) buses and trains, and Metra (Regional) trains long (decades) before the high rises and the property speculators moved in.

There were exactly the same services as were there during the period in which the article insists that Evanston (known as a pleasant, generally affluent town wrapped around a major university at least since I was born there 40 years ago) was somehow failed or depressed as there are now, except night service was a little better then.
It's a little frightening that they talk about reimplementing Swift and reusing code and all that, then if you dig deeply enough you find that in their language, collections and strings are reference types, not value types. That's a huge difference and makes their language decidedly not Swift.
Obligatory (valid) reason why Idea Sundays were stopped: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7693640

Previous discussion on the previous attempt to restart it (which includes a comment from the OP of this discussion): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10326550
I think you are quoting the part the protects their( livecoding.tv's ) intellectual property and , and not the streamer.

The license for the streamers stars at 11.Broadcasters.

It seems you are allowed to cancel the license:

11. Broadcasters

a.License from Livecoding.tv.

If you sign up for an account as a Streamer, subject to your compliance with these Terms of Service, Livecoding.tv hereby grants to you a personal, limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, freely revocable license to use the Livecoding.tv Service for the uploading and distributing of authorized digital content, including videos (" Broadcaster Content ").

and:

2.Except for Broadcaster Content already downloaded by users, the foregoing license granted by you terminates regarding a specific piece of Broadcaster Content once you remove or delete that Broadcaster Content from the Livecoding.tv Service.
Kind of like TaskRabbit
I've been unimpressed with LiveCoding.tv's spammy tactics as well.

The decided to enable email notification of video streams for users who have already signed up by using an opt-out system rather than opt-in system.

I created an account out of casual interest and then weeks later got slammed with dozens of spammy "stream is starting" emails every day.

I did actually try to delete my account as well but gave up when it appeared that they didn't allow for that option. Instead I've just been training Google that all the email from them is Spam.
Note to website operators: Ad blockers are not just a way of disabling annoying content. They prevent intrusive tracking and spying. If you can find a way to monetize my views without tracking my habits and sharing them with third parties, I'll happily disable my extensions.
Which country is that? Does "illegal" mean criminal liability or just that the sale is void?
What's the point of a project that never ships?
Contrast this story with that of the Cambodian-run donut empire of California: https://stories.californiasunday.com/2014-11-02/ted-ngoy-cal...

Both tell fascinating stories about donuts and entrepreneurship.
> For example say you want to have a "first" operator that takes the first item of a container, but also works on individual values if they aren't containers:

But why would I want to do such a thing? Not only does first() not make sense for non-container objects -- but calling x.first() when x is a non-container object is a bug 9 times out of 10 (i.e. something got unpacked when it shouldn't have, an [x] (a single-object vector) ended up x (i.e. the first and only value of that vector).
Sorry, not sure I understand. Display what?
I don't understand what on that page would let you read messages people sent while you're not connected, or let you participate in IRC over an unreliable connection such as a mobile network.
> expecting ownership of your content after giving up ownership of your content is logically unsound.

...which is why the OP is only really concerned about account deletion, not content deletion (the second half of the article). I am surprised Livecoding has not figured a way to have even a "shell" account with no personal data left but still have the content left untouched, considering the stringent EU laws surrounding personal data.
Competition with Amazon AWS won't come from where you expect. Amazon owns the public cloud, so whatever it is won't technically be a public cloud offering.
In 3D applications, these days, python is more or less everything you need for daily tasks. Even 3dsmax has relative python support now.
Don't forget that UTC has leap seconds, too. This may not cause problems for trains, but it does for servers:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8839458

TAI is like UTC but without leap seconds.
I use github for contributing to open-source projects where I want it to be public and accessible.

For everything else, including at work, I/we use privately hosted solutions like GitLab, where we control our own data.
Sure, and they'll continue to have limited knowledge as long as the media continues treating the continent like a monolith. WSJ readers are more sophisticated than the average, I would imagine they could handle it.
In the HTTP response:

<!-- Help functions -->
<?php include 'questions.php'; ?>
Not related to the actual article, but I got stuck on the word "coöperating".

Originally, I thought the "Umlaut" is a typo or a mistake, but, according to wiktionary, "coöperate" is an actual word! I still feel like pronouncing the second "ö" like in German though.
It's really more like this version of the image: http://i.imgur.com/DqKXPF3.png
Been a heavy IRC users in the 90s, no a Slack user. There just is no comparison for me. Do I miss channel wars, nickbots, take overs and hacks? No.
Ask HN: How do you manage cross-system dependencies?
On Debian (and many other Linux distros), managing dependencies on a single system is easy. Just declare that package "web" in Version 2.3 depends on package "backend" in Version 0.3.1 or higher. If you try to install "web-2.3" but your "backend" is too old, apt-get/aptitude will complain.

How do I get the same/similar behavior when the frontend and backend are on different servers?

When I heard of "orchestration" tools, I hoped they'd solve that problem, but the products I looked so far look like schedulers / pipelining systems, not like dependency managers.

What tools do you use to manage dependencies on multiple servers?

(In case it makes a difference, we use mostly Debian Jessie, and deploy our software as .deb packages via GoCD. Puppet is used for configuration management, though not for the deployment)
Exept that TaskRabbit doesn't accomplish a, d, e and f. So no, not really. You could build it on top of TaskRabbit I guess is what you are saying. True.
http://gitter.im is well suited for github projects!