skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You raise a good point though. Ethically, it's expected, but even ethical people are known to be drawn by greed on occasion.

That's why the incentive-structure needs to be flipped to be outcome-driven, not treatment-driven...
Actually many people on HN live in the pro-car-obsession bubble. Which seems strange for a group of people that is collectively educated, aware of issues, good at analysis of problems, and generally dreams of a better future.
Sure, they can use it to make it better, but I've yet to see proof that they need it to process your voice. I'm definitely not knowledgeable in this area, but I'd imagine that they could make an internetless standalone product that translates, but choose not to.
I can't imagine the in-mission mortality risk of a Mars mission would realistically be less than 5%, and 15% would not be unacceptable to me.

Thus the rationalist Mars mission: send a drone to Mars. Give your five favorite NASA crew members one shot in the head apiece with a fairly spun six shot pistol with one bullet chambered. This accomplishes all of your objectives, is cheaper, and minimizes the danger that the mission architects are underestimating the risk.
I live in NJ, in the shadow of NYC, and commute to work every day on some of the busiest roads in the state. The real problem I see are trucks. Big stupid semi-trailers and dumptrucks, queued up by the dozens with shipments fresh from the nearby *ports. Trucks, which exceed the lane space of a bus yet carry a single person. Sitting comfy in the left lane doing 15 under while traffic piles up behind them, another semi alongside blocking any traffic.
Canonical have the right to protect their brand. But what Canonical are doing is being so unclear about your obligations around their brand that it's impossible to know whether they'd consider a derivative an infringement of their rights.

If I release software under a BSD-style license with an additional proviso that you must demonstrate p=np before being able to redistribute it, we'd probably agree that it was non-free. If I release software under a BSD-style license with an additional proviso that you must replace a single file containing my trademark, we'd agree that it was free. Canonical's requirements are somewhere between these two things, but they won't tell us where. If it's impossible to determine whether a requirement is feasible, it's difficult to figure out what your practical ability to make use of those freedoms is.
"There is a reason for all the secrecy: The government argues it has a vested interest in keeping capabilities secret so that terrorists and other targets aren't able to figure out how to evade surveillance. That's one of the reasons some intelligence officials were quick to blame Snowden in the wake of the recent Paris attacks, arguing his revelations may have given terrorists a road map for how evade detection."

Didn't they use unencrypted SMS messages to coordinate?
Kay Sievers was actually a SUSE employee at the time, IIRC.

Now, there's a case to be made that the public statements of intent did not necessarily correspond to the actual function, or strategy that made systemd emerge.

Quoting from Lennart Poettering's Linux Voice interview [1]:

> We, at that time, thought: OK, Upstart is the future! Scott understood how init systems work – it needs to be dynamic, it needs to react to events, and it’s not the static thing that Sysvinit was. So we thought that was the way of the future, but as it progressed, we realised it probably wasn’t the future, because we realised that conceptually, it was the wrong design.

Now, furthermore, the goal of systemd became "universal GNU/Linux middleware," a massively increased scope relative to what Upstart was intended to be. Though it may have been the case that Upstart could have evolved into something similar to systemd-the-PID1, it appears to me that systemd's emergence would nevertheless have been determined by the desire for a homogeneous catch-all userland suite. The Upstart architecture, relying on so-called "bridges" at the time to marshall external events to and from the internal format, would likely not have been as desirable.

LP's testimony starkly contrasts with Kay and SJR.

[1] http://www.linuxvoice.com/interview-lennart-poettering/
It is a little barebones for a v1 release, but IMO I think it's better than working with the normal asyncio high-level functions.

What's wrong with the AGPL? I just thought it'd be the best fit for something like this.
I wouldn't link that to money issue. Rather than that I would say: "When all you have is hammer, everything looks like nail". Surgeons try to solve all the problems, including changing a light-bulb, by surgery, psychiatrists by psychotherapy, traditional Chinese medicine adepts by acupuncture.
The problem is that Canonical is (intentionally?) vague about what you need to do with their software to redistribute it. They have not answered requests for clarification. What do they consider trademarks, what do you need to remove?

This kind of (intentional?) legal ambiguity ends up having a chilling effect.
Thanks for the clarification on the license, I was not aware of this. :)
I thought you could get a code signing cert from MS, but the WHQL qualification is what involves the latter phase?
Perhaps, but honestly I doubt I would have considered this as a career path without the early "break."
This idea of paper-based games is nice, but I hope they are slightly more involved than [can you find five pictures with a donkey in them]. It would be great (particularly at museums that focus on science, industry, etc.) if these games implicitly motivated young people to draw connections between different realms of knowledge.

For instance, the connection between transportation and resource extraction is obvious to adults, but a young person may find it helpful if a paper-based game motivated them to consider how the cool steam engines connect with the coal mining exhibit.
Exactly whose safety are they concerned for? The volunteers who would gladly accept the risks of death, disease, and injury for a chance at glory? If we'd had this attitude to risk in the 1960s, the Apollo program would have ended after Apollo 1 burned up.
On Encryption and Terrorists
I have been wondering whether this is a prank or a con, so I have looked into the people behind this. The whois record shows the domain registered to one Nissan Bahar of Keepod Ltd, London, UK.

You may remember Keepod, the $7 personal computer the size of a USB stick that runs Android[1]. It got insane media coverage circa 2014[2], has a respectable-looking Wikipedia page[3], got funded to the tune of $41k on Indiegogo[4], currently is out-of-sale. $7 for an equivalent of Chromebit, I hear you thinking? Well, not really. The "personal computer" part of the pitch is a lie. In reality Keepod is the same kind of a live USB distro that has been around for years. There is no added value.[5]

So it is a con. But the media coverage. Is. Insane. The quality of the website is stellar. The funding dollars will be real. And a year from now, another seductively implausible project will appear. I'm looking forward to it, this guy has talent!

[1] http://www.keepod.com/
[2] https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=keepod+site:bbc.co.uk
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keepod
[4] https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/keepod-project-in-mathare...
[5] http://www.ictworks.org/2014/05/14/keepod-wasting-40000-to-r...
I am not sure about that, we were a small shop. Dell is bigger, but maybe has subcontractors.
A small plug for our company, Angaza Design; integration with various mobile money providers, such as M-Pesa, Airtel, and a bunch of others is one of our core strengths.

If you're interested in learning more about how they work, and you want to help the one billion poorest people on the planet move off kerosene onto clean solar, check us out -- we're hiring!

http://www.angazadesign.com/contact-page/#careers
This is why you disable flash and run NoScript.
How to Enable Multifactor Security on Amazon
"But no evidence has yet emerged that the attacks were coordinated using tools that protected communications through encryption, a security tool Snowden often recommends to everyday users looking to ensure their digital privacy. In fact, the information available so far suggests that the attackers sent an unencrypted text to coordinate the launch of the attack, and several of them had been known to Belgian investigators."
Note that developers pay very large development fees to cities. In many cities, those fees are their primary source of revenue. These fees are supposed to pay for infrastructure: water, sewer, roads, schools, parks, et cetera.

The biggest problem with these fees is that they are "local". Bedroom communities use these fees for local infrastructure, whereas a portion should be paid towards metro infrastructure.
The general claim is that your argument is flawed in "this accomplishes all of your objectives". I don't claim to be an expert in the field, but I've heard people who do care about and practice planetary and martian science that a manned mission could accomplish more than all the previous unmanned missions combined.
And once again we stumble on the Internet's weak point we could never fix -- the DNS.

Google wanted to fix the problem and, despite their best intention, became evil in the process. Now instead of racing for a .com name, people are fighting for search terms, bending to the opaque, machine enforced rules of a single entity driven by advertising revenues.
Eliminating SS and replacing it with UBI is not budget neutral unless we're operating from the assumption that it's okay for UBI to be below subsistence levels. Nobody I know, libertarian or otherwise, sees that as viable. We all agree that UBI would need to replace Social Security in that it pays out just enough to live on.
The thing to remember is that California doesn't have a state-wide drought crisis, it has hundreds of district-wide crises, which vary in degrees of severity. And each district operates independently of the others. This isn't just an administrative arrangement...they're managing different stores of water from different watersheds and it's not possible to "re-balance" water from one district to another without serious engineering work like the aqueduct systems that move water from the northern part of the state to the south.

This doesn't make it right for some people to ignore the fact we're in a drought and use that much water. But it also doesn't mean that it's some sort of class issue where rich people are getting away with using obscene quantities of water and poor people are getting fined because of some inherent bias towards those rich people. The people getting fined are living in the desert and their district is not meeting its conservation quotas, therefore fines. The district where the water hogs live is meeting its quotas, thanks to others who've conserved, so it's not handing out fines. It's two separate districts with two separate policies which both have reasonable explanations.

Perhaps there should be a statewide fine for anyone using more than, say, 500 gal per person per day, as a measure of solidarity with those who are being asked to conserve more. That would be reasonable, but it hasn't happened yet. And until it does, you can't really compare across water districts because they're all in different situations.
Might wanna add 2014 to the title?

Now that we have ES2015, I wonder if there's any performance difference between using a function and a class, even though class is "just sugar" over prototypes.
Actually, if you have a DVD or Blu-Ray disk, you only own a piece of plastic. As for the movie encoded upon it, you have no ownership rights--only an extremely limited license to do a single thing with it (decrypt and read it for the purpose of immediate viewing) using one of a limited number of industry-approved reading devices. That doesn't really satisfy any reasonable definition of ownership.
The shell game is as much for the courts as it is for the people. The courts have demonstrated a de facto inability to enforce judgments and subpoenas against the US intelligence community, and part of the trick is obfuscating responsibility.
What do you think you've learned from living/working in so many different cities?

I love hearing advice and insight from people who've lived in a lot of different US cities. What similarities they've noticed, what differences, etc.
There is no hive-mind about this issue on HN. About half the comments here are from people who dispute the article.

From my own personal experience(real life, not on-line), techies are by FAR more pro-car, and dismissive off traditional urbanism. Real Engineers outside software even more so. I think it is because suburban homes have a lot of space for all the crap tinkerers collect. Hobbies in this crowd tend to skew to things with stuff; drones, cars, ... A more introverted disposition may drive engineers to the quiet and seclusion of the suburbs too. Plus, engineers like to optimize things. Keep the process intact, but strive for less travel time, less fuel consumption, less pollution, less casualties. Hence electrical cars. Hence self-driving cars. But always "cars".

Not necessarily related to what you were saying, but I'll sneak it in anyway:

Traffic is not a technological challenge, it is a human one, with all the messiness that entails. An anthropologist can just as well study traffic (and propose solutions) as a traffic engineer. The big mistake in the US was to hand over the governance and implementation of our urban environment to technocrats. The planning profession has long since come around, precisely because often they were educated in sociology departments (Oh, the affront an engineer must feel when he has to justify building codes to this numbnut planner who probably only passed intro to stats by schmoozing with the TA!). Anyway, eventually the bureaucrats, legislators, and building professionals will come around too. But it requires for a lot of people to reject what they have - literally - bought into. The suburbs are NOT doomed though, there's a lot of good about it. But they are expensive. So the suburbs at all cost are most definitely coming at an end. Municipalities are strained financially, precisely because the financial obligations of maintaining car sprawl are high. On an individual level, the suburbs just cost a lot too. Everybody needs a car, maintenance & utilities costs of the home are born by just a single household, etc... The suburbs are massive social engineering, a federal project to promote home ownership and promote financial independence. Plus, a sprawling city would be more resilient should a nuclear war breakout, that paranoia was also something in the 50s. The home ownership part has succeeded, but the financial independence part has been a total failure.
We've already sent a number of drones to Mars. There are rational reasons for wanting to send humans as well: Humans can do things on Mars that drones cannot, and they pave the way for possible colonization in the future.
I'm glad to see that people are generally in acceptance of the notion that there is a lot to keep up with if you want to survive, and that using references is a good thing. I believe its good to be a specialist as well.

I've been using the docs since I started on qbasic, and I learned theory through the years through building websites and keeping up with the latest trends (and it turned out most of the theory is how I understood code to begin with).

Stack overflow is awesome because its accessible and useful to everyone, and I don't think there's a danger that people would just fake it until they make it with SO - that's nearly impossible.

I rely on it at times for best practice concepts since I work alone and don't have real people to talk to.
FTA: ""This is yet another trick move in the never-ending shell game that the NSA is playing with the American people, and apparently with the secret court whose oversight it is trying to evade," said Kevin Bankston, the director of New America's Open Technology Institute. "New rule: if the NSA claims that a particular surveillance program has ended, or that a particular type of surveillance has halted 'under this program,' assume that it is still going on in another program.""

It's hard to keep up with the latest abuses because, as the article mentions explicitly, the government is perpetually playing a shell game with its surveillance programs in order to deceive the public and its other enemies which the programs target. The government works from the assumption that an outed surveillance program is a surveillance program rendered ineffective, meaning that there's consistent internal pressure to reorganize, rename, and reconfigure existing programs that get hit with daylight. In order to kneecap oversight, regulatory questions are answered as literally as possible, using the most deceptive and narrow terms as possible. The terms that they use are typically internally defined in bizarre and obtuse ways for the purposes of propaganda, and these definitions are never made explicitly clear to the public or regulators. This is how we get to the point of a very straightforward, unambiguous term such as "collection" actually being defined by the NSA as "processing data for intelligence purposes after it has been found, categorized, scraped via algorithm, and stored."

In summary: it's hard to keep up because the surveillance agencies are intentionally being evasive of public and political oversight, because they are engaged in immoral programs which are perpetually extralegal.

EDIT:

An additional bonus of this maskirovka-style strategy is that the press will be bungled up habitually by reporting in the government's desired terms. This means that if the press even does understand the true meanings of the propaganda terms used, the public will be getting a confusing and often inconsistent narrative that is hard to make sense of. The press will also typically publish articles detailing the denial of wrongdoing from the government, and will rarely publish the highly detailed and factual accusations of wrongdoing in the first place.
Yeah you would definitely need to test both the soil and the mushrooms. The last time I checked the only paper I found on Calvatea hyper-accumulating heavy metals was the old one that looked at samples a couple hundred yards from highways in Connecticut, so I think right now we probably just don't have enough data.
Dream Catchers – 1950s “database of dreams”
I learned a little C in college, then taught myself Java in the evenings while working as a ME, then got the job and learned the C# .NET stack, and now my latest client is back to Java. I'm missing .NET terribly but luckily my startup uses it so I still get to stay up on it.
Oh. Thanks. Seems I misunderstood "text" in this context... In our country we're used to calling this SMS messages and I can never get used to "text messages". Hat tip to you.
There are people trying to spread the idea of cooperatives to "sharing economy" tech platforms.[1][2]

[1] http://platformcoop.net/video-stream

[2] http://americablog.com/2015/11/meet-the-activists-who-would-...

Hopefully some discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10615241
M-Pesa got there first and is by far the dominant mobile money system in Kenya, regardless of competitors like Airtel Money. Even people who use Airtel for their phone service will still keep a Safaricom SIM card on hand so they can use M-Pesa.
No. It is offering an executable pretending to be a flash player installer. Nothing to do with actually running flash.
Intel's first processor with performance-boosting FPGA to ship early next year
amatxn, no promises but let's talk. More info is in my profile.
How is it protecting their brand to say that I am not allowed to redistribute the libpcap0.8 binary package that they built, written by other developers, licensed under the 3-clause BSD license, packaged by Debian developers, and the only reference to Ubuntu is the substitution of "Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers <ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com>, Original-Maintainer: Romain Francoise <rfrancoise@debian.org>" in the binary package details, that they automatically add when they rebuild the package on their infrastructure?

That sounds more like "taking the work of others and trying to pass it off as their own" rather than "protecting their brand."

No one involved has a problem with branding guidelines that require replacing graphics, strings, and other branding information that shows up in user-visible locations. The problem is the weird and vague rules that Canonical imply to mean that anyone who redistributes packages from Ubuntu have to rebuild all binary packages (with an exception for GPL'd packages if that requirement would conflict with the GPL licensing which doesn't allow adding extra restrictions).

Because of restrictions like this, third parties who create forks of Ubuntu are left in a weird legal limbo. It can be solved by doing a full rebuild of all packages, but it is a lot of work and very error prone to set up a build system and rebuild every package. Rebuilding only the ones necessary for removing user-visible branding and whatever local changes are necessary is much simpler.

The other problem is that this policy was imposed relatively recently (in 2013). The previous trademark policy did not mention needing to rebuild all binary packages. So people who were relying on the earlier trademark policy are left in the lurch.
some odd things, which are not worth mass production:

* http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00QPA3K92
* http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00TTCHHJ2
* http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00RYFM3R2

I have few more ideas in a pipeline. It is not bringing much money, but it does pay for my hobby.

EDIT: I am also open source all of the stuff i am selling (under non-commercial license for obvious reasons) - https://github.com/hippich/stl
http://geer.tinho.net/geer.blackhat.6viii14.txt - some more technical analysis on what can be done

Another interesting site here is http://citizenlab.org/ and the idea of 'distributed security' they champion.
That stuff doesn't even suffice to pay for the roads, so there wouldn't be any surplus available to appropriate to other uses.
No, travel demand modeling includes transit shares and modeling.

More roads are a fantastic solution for encouraging mobility of individuals. Yes, it is difficult from a group planning point of view, but think about it from the users point of view. There is a single dad who is restricted by her availability of time to a thirty minute commute window. If he has no available car, he is forced to a bus route based job, or bicycle / walking distance job. Locations for bus routes are chosen by top-down planning based on productions and attractions, with a preference for utilization based on larger employers, think hospital and hospitality. The buses drive the single dad to a certain area and precludes him from looking for jobs in non-bus route areas. You are forcing an individual to choose a non-ideal job based on a push for modal share and the "Planners" basis of what is best, not the individual.

Road diets are dangerous for the populace. Look at Los Angeles current push for road diets that will decrease the levels of service across the city from 18% failure to 30% failure and the warnings that the emergency services say about the corresponding decrease in response times.

The school run in the mornings is a good thing to focus on, here in the United States, we force the kids onto a crazy schedule of arriving in class before 8:00am.
Frozen Lion Cubs Still Have Their Fur 12,000 Years Later
No. Free software is software that confers, as practical capabilities, the four fundamental software freedoms to its users.

If what you said were true, whence the GPLv3? Tivoization, impossible build systems, etc., absolutely can defeat the purpose and spirit of free software. When they do, we are right to call projects hobbled by such practices 'virtually unfree' or 'practically proprietary' or whatever.