skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I didn't realize I was talking with an architect. Sorry if I come off too aggressive. :)

I honestly think that there would be big loads of cash to be made in architecture if somebody would take strict back to the roots + science approach.

If you could contact CEO of general electric and show him proof that his employees are 10% more productive in a workplace you designed than what is industry standard at the moment, budget is no real constraint anymore. You could do that, psychology is lot more quantitative these days than ever before.

The result would probably not be "WOW" architecture. It's probably lot about windows. And you have to take interior, exterior and surroundings into account at the same time. Probably quite traditional and boring building. But possibly lot more interesting than this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/GE_Schen...

You would not get your name on architecture magazines. But you would make lives better. Happy employee is productive employee.

I hope you are not offended. This is nothing personal. I'm just frustrated with so much outright ugly factories and offices everywhere, and architects are juggling around Guggenheim. What works in art doesn't work in buildings, because we have to live with the crap that never would have gotten out of studio.
It's not the backhaul that is the chokepoint. It's local nodes near your house. The one you share with 50-100 homes or more.
TPP will ban rules that require source code disclosure
Machine vs. Machine: Inside DARPA’s Fully Automated CTF
It's really not a competition.
Cleveland Clinic is pretty good.

In the last few years there has been a "Cambrian Explosion" in targeted cancer treatments, and it makes a lot of sense to investigate clinical trials you can participate in if you have a difficult case
>The BEST result you can get from spending on security is...nothing bad happens.

That's crap =]. A secret about security compliance (aka defense in depth) is that it actually reduces your technical debt, doesn't increase it. That's the best result in the world, low technical debt!
There is no correct price. There is just consensus. The notion of price discovery is just about getting investors to share their beliefs by making offers, getting to an inherently real answer.

On average, the market grows in value because companies eventually pay dividends from profitable endeavors.
Debian still supports big endian PowerPC (including 32-bit). You can successfully install jessie on a PowerPC Mac mini.

I still use one to test software because testing on "weird" hardware reveals more bugs.

But obviously not everyone does that, so some of the software in the package manager still has aforementioned bugs.
For years I've been drawing AWS architecture diagrams in the isometric style of https://aws.amazon.com/architecture/ by hand in vector programs. I personally find the look very pleasing and clear, and with this free tool I hope to make the style accessible to everyone regardless of skill.

I would deeply appreciate any feedback on Cloudcraft that you might have here in the comments. Thanks!
You know that it works for at least two values of w, but you don't know that it holds for any value of w.
Cookie law, VAT MOSS, Abmahnungen and now the Öttinger tax. Even if you don't care about the risk, you would be stupid to found a startup in a EU country.
Flash already runs in a different process, even without e10s enabled.

Dunno why your Firefox is crashing every time it encounters Flash or similar media, but I can assure you that's not a common experience. Maybe try enabling click-to-play?
Show HN: A Single API to Everything (cloud Services and IoT)
the html formula consists mostly out of sqares because of missing unicode characters on my windows 10... not really convincing, really
A big problem with a lot of enterprise application security models nowadays is that if you don't assume that your network has been compromised and that there's active attackers in your network already, you're pretty much setting yourself up for a Home Depot and Target situation. Nevermind that both of these companies are having record sales and stock valuations, enterprise security in practice is more about compliance and dealing with the cost of auditors / regulators showing up and slowing your business down than about loss of revenue and customer safety. Because if people really cared that much about companies that messed up their security, Apple would have had tanking iPhone sales, everyone would have flocked to Lowe's, and Wal-Mart would be picking up where Target's market share went down - none of these things are true at all, in fact the precise opposite.

Companies use deep packet inspection systems on their networks that can actively block packets that look malicious like this attack though, and it's how a lot of enterprises aren't hacked to smithereens every day despite the unfathomable incompetence of so many people working on "critical" applications. I had to deal with an issue where an application was not sending back Ajax requests on occasion that was causing a lot of panic, and it turned out that the reply sent back was being blocked due to a network packet inspection device actively blocking the response because it detected HTTP headers that matched an Apache vulnerability from 2002.

To me, this counts as "remote" because you can build up a big library of dozens of enterprise BS-ware applications that enterprises fail to patch all the time and probably find something that people didn't secure right. Qualys probably won't even be catching this stuff (it's stupid enough to think that a Chef server is running Django and continue to keep probing)
As I mentioned in a recent thread[1], the government's approach to cybersecurity has been 100% offense. I suspect this may be a pre-network strategy being applied to a networked world, where concepts like border security and enumerating threats[2] actually worked.

In the late-80s/early-90s, I used to laugh at the common sci-fi trope of always having some convenient way to hack into anything. I originally assumed this was literary license[3]; surely nobody would actually be dumb enough to to put critical systems on a publicly-accessible network! Well... I guess I was wrong. Not only were we stupid enough to connect everything to a network, some people are trying to start an entire industry based on the idea of plugging things into the internet.

We've simply gotten lucky so far; we have barely scratched the surface of what can be done. I know rare problems are notoriously hard to model. Getting people to properly prepare for these events or even simply understand the actual cost of failure can be incredibly difficult, but that doesn't mean the problem can be ignored.

I almost see a similarity to the martingale[4] betting strategy. It works ok until you get your first rare set of consecutive losses and you bottom out your bankroll. The core problem in martingale is that it requires you to have an unbounded pool of cash to work with, so maybe the answer insecurity is related to only accepting risks if the risk has known bounds.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10482498

[2] http://www.ranum.com/security/computer_security/editorials/d...

[3] JMS has talked about the need for license when he wrote Babylon 5, where he said that the ships always move "at the speed of plot".

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale_%28betting_system%2...
We launched CloudRail with a new technology and are looking for feedback :) It is a universal API for Everything. Means a single API / SDK to integrate arbitrary RESTful APIs. The idea: you configure your custom API with the services and functions you need. Example: I want to integrate Dropbox and need a function to upload a file and Philips Hue with a function to switch on the light. CloudRail bundles all that in a custom API which is then exposed to your app via our SDK. We started with some connected services, but the cool thing is, you can add further clouds or smart devices. It is designed to be a community driven tool to easily integrate 3rd party services. From developers for developers.
The most sane pricing would probably be per bit with surge pricing during congestion periods. But customers would flip out at that.
Atom is excellent if your primary language is JS. It is slower than sublime in my experience but not dramatically. Ofcourse, I am not opening 500mb files etc so if you have those requirements then you are probably best sticking with the current setup
VAT MOSS did not only harm invisible potential improvements. It makes thousands of small business economically unviable.
Same will be true for the new Oettinger law.
I used to live in Poland where cryotherapy is pretty popular in sanatoria (in the European sense of the word) and did a few sessions: three minutes a day over two weeks. It certainly helped with my running injuries, especially shin splints.
>"Storing the mapping on a large device doesn't make sense" - I agree about this, the large device being a bulky host computer.

Strawman. The large device is the keyboard you need to lug around. Tell me, is your keyboard designed for use with a computer?

>Various OSes have various (sometimes quite severe) limitations regarding remapping and the "script" that you mention is also OS-specific which is a pain if you use multiple OSes.

No. It isn't a pain, it called hacking and you only need to do it once and it is free and shareable. So in this sense only one person has to do it once and it just works for everyone else from then on.
The decision made yesterday is just that - a clinical trial - so that is under way - "their best bet" so much as he told us
I agree with your sentiment, but as far as yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, I obviously wouldn't recommend it but it's not so simple: "Oliver Wendell Holmes made the analogy during a controversial Supreme Court case that was overturned more than 40 years ago"

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time...
Judging by the stark lack of intelligence displayed by these attacks on TTP, it is probably a fine treaty.
This is something that the UX people of gnome could actually be useful for..
I think you are putting the cart before the horse here, because current practice of software development is in a different universe than the one in which it is done as responsibly as you propose, and a developer's code of ethics is not the tool to move us there.

There have been projects of the sort you propose (the space shuttle software comes to mind), but they are few and far between, and it simply not possible to quickly change the industry in general without completely replacing it. Putting aside the technical challenges, it simply is not economically feasible - we don't have the resources.

The situation was very different with the Quebec bridge. At that time, the practice of quantitative engineering had advanced to the point where large, safe bridges could be reliably built, and all that was needed to make it happen was to deal with some human problems leading to sloppiness. The desired outcome was within grasp, and the public demanded it. Until the practice of software development reaches those points, a code of ethics is not going to make it happen. The department store collapse shows that engineering ethics need to be supported by society to be effective (and by support, I mean more than just lip service, and the support has to come from the people who set the agenda.)

Edit: Let me explain further what I meant by 'quantitative engineering'. Bridge designs are analytically verified to ensure that they meet a formal set of safety requirements before they are built. In contrast, almost all software is built and then tested (and fixed, and tested...) against an informal specification (even in iterative and agile methods, the building of parts precedes their testing, as it must.) Analysis is relatively much less important, and is generally informal.
Why does 32 seem old to you? Residency and fellowship are real doctor jobs doing real doctor work.
I believe it is more incompetence, lack of technology understanding and / or complete ignorance. You can't explain otherwise how a person like Oettinger can be put in charge of such an important part of the economy.

I'm still waiting when they suggest that airline pilots can be replaced with bus drivers to stop them going on strike / industrial action - it's called an Airbus so there shouldn't be much difference, after all it has bus in the name.
Isn't the person (team?) who makes Autoprefixer Russian? I wonder if this is a subtle swipe at the political climate there.
E.g. you want to sell digital goods in the EU? Check VAT MOSS.
You can't find a EU law which will be a show stopper for you? No problem, there will be a national law which kills your business idea.
You can find them online. Some might require root some don't. They can also enable complete programmability and deep iteraction with the system if needed, unlike macros.

Using scripts works out of the box without hacking for ages as well. You only need to write the script once, and then share it with the world. This is the point I made in other comments already which you read but ignored the point.
>I mean, have any vendors actually gone beyond SQL-92?

Yes. Here's a pretty good summary presentation (it says it's Postgres-focused, but it provides adoption data for the major vendors)[0] and the HN comments[1].

What we tend to see (I speak from a position as a BI consultant - I get to see lots of companies' database infrastructure) is that adoption of new SQL constructs is mostly limited by the developers, and in some cases IT departments who won't upgrade SQL server software.

New SQL being limited by developers comes in two flavors, crusty DBAs and do-it-all-in-the-app-layer developers. The second type tends to be more common among demographics similar to HN.

[0] http://www.slideshare.net/MarkusWinand/modern-sql

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9018129
Lectures in packed classrooms are certainly efficient, as you explained yourself.
>How else do you discriminate?

If you're not offering a competitive streaming option, you're not really eligible to receive that revenue anymore. You can't just invent a new way to monitize it with existing customers who have existing agreements for your services without offering them something to agree to, then allowing for their choice.
This paper should be titled: Why Johnny Still, Still Can't Use Mailvelope: Evaluating the Usability of Mailvelope.
Open for any feedback!
I disagree, even if customers would not flip out. Charging per bit is an incorrect alignment to consumption of a finite resource (such as water, gas, or even electric). Data is not a finite resource, as receiving data does not deplete the source providing the data. The only sane way to charge for connectivity is to charge for operations and support, with a profit percentage.
No system that attempts to typeset from source in the browser will be able to compete.

It can easily take more than a second to compile a laTeX document with a moderate number of formulas. Sure, some of this could be optimised but not _that_ much - the best you can do is either force the user to wait for you to typeset accurately or show some close approximation that will never be on par with TeX.
If you cannot analyse the binaries, or, conversely, if the authors cannot obfuscate the source code to the point of being unintelligible, neither of you are worthy as engineers.
Lennart Poettering: Systemd and Control Groups [video]
It may or may not have anything to do with congestion. No Internet provider wants to advertise issues about congestion to their customers.
Exede seems to be moving away from this model, actually. Their new plans don't offer unlimited periods at all, but instead, some types of traffic are exempt from the caps. The problem with that is Exede won't say exactly what type of data is exempt other than "basic web browsing and email." No one really knows if that includes HTTPS, HTTP2, QUIC, WebSockets, etc.
Dropbox in read-only mode due to planned site maintenance
Interview by a 15 Year Old
>To be fair, as long as you are building systems on top of general purpose operating systems and exposing them to the internet, you're going to be vulnerable to one hack or another. No matter how much money you throw at the problem, this won't be the last time someone hacks someone's email account or figures out a password to a police computer.

This is crap =]. There's only 3 ways an attacker can get in.

1. Software Bug - 0-day exploits are only effective until the developer fixes the bad code (patch).

2. Configuration Drift - Attackers can only pop boxes that have drifted away from being updated or hardened. That's why they can only pop one of the boxes...not all the boxes. That's why you Recon more than Infiltrate.

3. Social Engineering - Why does the person who is easily susceptible to phishing have keys to the castle?

All-the-time diligence (not point-in-time diligence) implemented on security controls is what's needed. Not more cyber-offense (e.g. Penetration Testing, Vulnerability Scanning, Risk Assessments)
Also we are currently building two supercarrier's so the Meteor missile will probably end up on the F35, it's a hell of a missile.

Not just a purchaser of the EF, we co-built it with the Germans/Italians as part of a consortium.
Gahydhief
Hdjhehueyu
Hhghtsgyeturr
Gdfjyeduirsgi
Hfckdftdagy
Hdfktwgurs
Hdfhfd
Show HN: gBoxShadow.js – Gravity-Sensing box-shadow for flat UI
Are you the fine article's author?
Understanding Redux
I wrote about this 13 years ago during the Les Kelly vs. Arriba Soft Corp. court case(s):

http://www.kozubik.com/published/decisions.txt

I went the other way, though - my thought experiment was, what if you came up with a standard way to "say" a URL in plain english. As in, just a wordy, colloquial way to describe the content that is in a URL.

Obviously this would fall under free speech and nobody would consider barring such speech ...

So I think now, as I did then, that if you really want to demonstrate the ridiculous nature of these proposals, you need a browser plug-in that allows you to describe URLs in plain english and then demonstrate that to the court (or whomever).
Quite so. Usually the same in mobile networks, but sometimes backhaul is a limitation there still.
Libya and Iraq can effectively added to this list.
Salient and relevant:

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/paris.metro.minimal.pdf
Ironically enough, LP actually makes a great case for what an inconsistent and semantically disparate interface cgroups really are. This gives quite a bit of validation to Al Viro's acerbic rants against cgroups (among other questionably designed kernel features).

As such, for a Linux-based service manager, one would be wise to skip cgroups entirely in favor of subscribing to a Netlink channel to get cn_proc events to get the "reliable process tracking" aspect, and optionally communicate with a well-defined external cgroup writer for delegating on cgroupfs operations (if at all desirable to support them beyond conforming to standards).
So? It doesn't mean they can't interact with each other and get indivual benefits from the experience.
The marketing for these products always amazes me.
Yeah, I don't think this is going to turn out well for them. Granted lulzsec was broken up by having a mole so it might make it more difficult for law enforcement, but then again the FBI has been known to use blackhat means to track people across tor[0] and use malware to obtain information[1].

[0] http://www.wired.com/2013/09/freedom-hosting-fbi/

[1] http://www.wired.com/2014/08/operation_torpedo/
Here's the theme used. http://wrapbootstrap.com/preview/WB0N38R04
Soon, someone is going to post a similar breach, where they gained access to anyone's browsing history in the UK! Brave new world...
How old are they?
What does "useful" mean? Survival and propagation are strong indicators.
Metered goods have a long history of having to have the meters certified by state bodies.

For instance, grocery store scales, gas pumps, power meter manufacturers, etc.

If we're going to lose the fight with Comcast over metered bandwidth, then perhaps we need to push for laws regarding inspection and validation of their metering systems themselves.

If they're limiting consumers to a certain amount of traffic, I want the definition of traffic to be clearly delineated and for the measurement systems to be properly inspected and regulated.

For instance, do they measure at the modem? At the local node? At the edge of the network?

Does local traffic within Comcast's city-wide network count?

If someone sends an IP traffic that their computer never requested and is filtered out, does it add to the traffic usage?

Does a UDP broadcast in a subnet count towards everyone's bandwidth, even if the cable modem filters it out?

Does this cover ICMP and UDP?

Does Comcast's own "Are you there?" packets to cable modems count towards traffic allotments? Does Comcast's cable modem traffic to the registration and DHCP servers count?

If they're going to screw-over customers, then there needs to be clear rules they have to follow so they can't just make up numbers. There also needs to be a way to make sure that DDOS attacks can't attack the bills of customers.
>the government's approach to cybersecurity has been 100% offense.

I also read your other comment that you posted in the comment
>This is a serious problem, not only from the problems intelligence angies with many powers and poor oversight; ignoring defense is going to bite a lot of people in bad ways. We are already seeing the beginnings of this with the escalating impact computer-based attacks are having on their victims.

I agree. Yes its embarrassing and they keep claiming "Do more Penetration Testing, more Vulnerability Scanning, more Risk assessment" Nobody even knows what the hell that even means and we're still getting breached! The biggest mistake we've made is to claim, "a great offense is always the best defense."

We should be doing Security Compliance aka Defense in Depth! But everybody seems to think Defense in Depth is somehow different from Security Compliance.

>Defense in Depth is when multiple layers of security controls are placed throughout a critical environment. It is a layering tactic, conceived by the National Security Agency (NSA) as a comprehensive approach to information and electronic security.

If they actually went through the diligence of conforming with the security controls (ISO 27002, FEDRAMP, NIST 800-53) that they defined (much like financial compliance conforms to policies, standards, or laws), they'd be in a much more comprehensive shape. Even PCI-DSS...just replace the word cardholder data with sensitive data and you have more defense than whatever snake-oil Security Risk Plan is out there.

I champion for compliance =).
The US has the same caveats, it's just that the limitations of free speech are decided in case law instead of specifically codified.

> For the prevention of disorder of crime

There are all sorts of types of speech that are criminal in the US because they are either a crime, or encourage/enable crime in some way.

> for the protection of health and morals

There are plenty of examples in the US of speech being limited for health reasons.

Protection of morals is a bit more of a gray area, but certainly there are historical examples of the US limiting speech for reasons that amount to morality.

> for the protection of the reputation or rights of others

Again, libel is a crime in the US.
Bournemouth 0-1 Newcastle – Match Report
Is Psychology a Science?
This is cool, but the website is not very accessible: I found it really hard to read a dark grey font on a black background.
"It only strangles big industry"
Actually it helps the big industry as the small business owner are struggling.
For example the VAT MOSS rule. Amazon, Google or Apple will not have any problem to fulfill this law. A small company selling software to EU customer will not be able to handle the bureaucratic effort.