skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What are your thoughts re: adding memory protection to C? (in other words: add a distinction between "pointer bytes" and "raw data bytes" and some rules regarding pointer assignment, arithmetic, and dereferencing that serve to treat the pointer bytes as protected memory of a "3rd space" that sits between kernel space and user space; thereby ensuring that a program can only obtain a pointer to either a stack location (with restrictions) or heap location that points to a byte in an allocated segment of memory?)
The article linked suggests that they are not giving any money away.
Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard

Zuck: Just ask

Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS

[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?

Zuck: People just submitted it.

Zuck: I don't know why.

Zuck: They "trust me"

Zuck: Dumb fucks
Holometer rules out first theory of space-time correlations
Lots of rich people have hidden their wealth in non-profits or corporations as foundations to avoid paying taxes on them.

It is called a Jackie O Trust because Jackie O was famous for making such an organization and left the money to her children as tax free income after she passed away.

Almost every rich family has such a trust in their name.

It is a good PR move because it looks like they are giving back the money, when in secret they only give away a small amount of money and keep the rest in investments to hand down to their children at a future date, etc.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-09-12/how-wal-ma...

http://www.bloomberg.com/infographics/2013-09-12/how-to-pres...

It is actually using tax loopholes to avoid paying taxes to use such an organization to hide your money in it.

He did not found a charity he founded a LLC:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/alexkantrowitz/not-all-of-mark-zucke...

The news media sort of reported it would be a charity but it is not. It is a Jackie O trust.

Bill Gates has his own and tried to invest $2B USD in schools:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/06/...

It failed miserably, test scores did not improve, despite trying to build better and high tech schools with smaller classes and personalized learning for each student. The same thinking that went to build Microsoft can't be used to solve socioeconomic problems because that requires a different type of thinking. Students have problems learning due to poverty, family issues, emotional and psychological issues, and other stuff. Spending the money on better schools does not address any of those problems.
Political verbiage is no match to executable technology. If you don't like something, write source code that will make a difference, and if you can't, you lose. That is why the libertarian argument will always win.
Good Tech Lead, Bad Tech Lead (2014)
Eh, but you're assuming that money to charities is always a good thing. There are a) some pretty terrible charities out there and b) some patently fake charities that are designed as money laundering schemes.

The tax code works because it was written by people who had huge amounts of wealth and were pissed that the federal government (the People of the U.S.) created an income tax.

No other developed country has such crazy laws regarding charity donations as the U.S.
I think you're misunderstanding entropy; it only really applies in a closed system. By using energy from the sun to "decrease" entropy on earth, what you've don't is just expand the system to include energy from the sun. You've converted solar energy into kinetic and potential energy (moving things around, ordering them, building walls etc). That transformation isn't perfectly efficient - friction, electrical resistance, etc. create waste heat, which disappeared and can no longer be used. You've cleaned up one area of the system (decreasing entropy) but the means you used to do so used more than you gained. Entropy ALWAYS increases.
They state that Behavior Trees provide the same functionality as Finite State Machines, however since there appear to be no loops (remember they are a tree) how would you handle iteration or recursion ?

Finite State Machines don't have memory per se, but duplication of states can create the illusion of memory.
if you have five states in a row that expect a particular situation/sequence, then this could emulate a counter up to five. I think this could be done with multiple states in a behavior tree. But a FSM could have a physical loop back to a previous state which would emulate an unknown number of states. I don't see how to do this with Behaviour trees.

I'd like to see more details, and of course, if anyone actually has used these, I'd like to hear how repetition is supported, or even time varying values.
Delusions of grandeur?

He puts himself on quite a pedestal, comparing himself to Fonda like he's the righteous movie star, but I'm no psychologist.

It might be hard, but try to understand the minority perspective in viewing the system, you might trust any part of it, and you'll see things like bias and privilege even when they don't exist.
Thanks Mats! I've been looking for something like this for a while.
Your comment makes it sound like the documentary is an expose of mismanagement. It's not; it was put together on purpose by Double Fine to show how difficult game development can be, and to show what happens with the money people pledged... which is a heck of a lot more than I've seen from many other Kickstarted projects.
Sadly, for me all that appears is a Stanford University slate.

Are you sure of the URL?
It's been argued that it gives a few incredibly wealthy people undue influence on public spending. Instead of being taxed and then spent according to the government's priorities, which is at some level accountable to the public, a few wealthy people get to decide what programs have merit and pour their money into them.
Good Product Manager/Bad Product Manager [pdf]
>...an idiot while in college...

But "Young people are just smarter" -Mark Zuckerberg [1]

[1]http://venturebeat.com/2007/03/26/start-up-advice-for-entrep...
Most charitable gifts are a form of tax avoidance (and _all_ of them potentially are if a person's income is such that it makes sense to take advantage of itemized deductions). People get receipts for charitable contributions precisely so they can deduct those amounts from their taxable income. Zuckerberg's plan is of much larger scale, but the fact is that the tax code is set up to encourage charitable contributions by making them non-taxable. The tax code is set up this way, quite understandably, to encourage individuals to make charitable gifts, by creating an extra "bang-for-your-buck" for people who choose to make them.

The linked article seems to suggest that Zuckerberg is trying to take advantage of the system by gaining tax-exempt status while effectively _not_ making charitable gifts, that he is somehow trying to pass everything to the child while taking advantage of tax-exempt status of a charitable organization. I'm skeptical both that his intent is to try to do this, and that there is any scheme that could legally accomplish this.

On a different, but related, note, if I were a parent with $40Bn (or $30Bn, $20Bn, $10Bn, or even $1Bn) I would certainly avoid any plan where the bulk of my estate was to be left to my child. Having that much money is a big responsibility, and it's not something that's likely to add to a person's quality of life. Quite the contrary, it's likely a hindrance, not something I would want to saddle my child with. At most, leave them some large amount ($5M, $10M, $20M, $50M?), something basically guaranteed to make them a wealthy person who doesn't need to worry about money, but hopefully not enough to require that responsible management of their fortune be a main focus of their life. (I realize there are moral implications of having that much money for anyone who has even $10M -- perhaps even $1M -- but when the amounts get astronomical, say to hundreds of millions or more, the moral responsibility really does -- or should -- become almost overwhelming. Not a burden I'd want to put on my child.)
Good point. Why is anyone in prison? We should just let them all run free because we have optimism and faith in their ability to self-reform.
You can't stop us from snarking, Dang.
Well, it is proportionally less money for the things that are funded the most by the government.
It is one persons detailed account of a very important aspect of our society that few people know much about (I personally do not know anyone who has actually served on a jury let alone in a murder trial). I enjoyed reading it. I think it would be worth reading to understand how someone felt throughout this process whether or not you agreed with that persons feelings or interpretation. After all, if you are on trial this juror (or jury) may be representative of who will judge you.
But they can create new with the new polynomial and try to check against that first. If it fails then fall back to regular polynomial.
Half of this article is this woman seriously personifying her "robot"

Correct, because it is her eyes and ears in her workplace, and she sees and talks through it every weekday. I find an exploration of what that means to a person to be absolutely fascinating, I'm really not sure what's creepy about it.
Anyone willing to make a Gource video?

https://github.com/acaudwell/Gource/wiki/Videos
This, obviously, does not make sense. The entire $45billion would not have been given over to taxes.
So what? What if Bill Gates revealed on his deathbed that he did all his charity work only for egotistical reasons? So what? Good for him, he gets the ego boost he wants, we get a better world.

If Mark Zuckerberg puts his wealth towards the greater good, then that's good, no matter what his reasons are. Why does he get more flack for doing this than for the Walton family giving nothing to charity?

If Mark just wanted to avoid taxes, he would've done so quietly. If he's doing it for his own ego, then that's good: it means he is incentivized to be effective in his charity.
Many antibiotics are already derivatives of other antibiotics. The problem is that bacteria are developing resistances to whole families of medication. You can tweak erythromycin and get clarithromycin or azithromycin, but that means nothing when the mechanism of action they exploit has been patched in resistant bacteria.
I don't think Zuckerberg is trying to avoid estate tax but even if he is and if he's doing it legally, this is something we should complain to the Congress for writing bad tax code.
Fair. Edited comment.
Show HN: CodeInsight
Nah man. You're a person... I'm a person. It's elementary. We can always understand, and it seems like you're insulting the intelligence of the public talking like you do.

Being informed is almost always better.
Yep, I don't get it. I don't have a particularly good opinion of Facebook, but I can't understand criticizing this charity scheme. Even if it is merely for tax avoidance, so what? That merely places him on the same level as everybody else. (Anybody here intentionally pay more taxes than required?)
I was just clarifying for other readers. I looked through it because I've been working on some Python crypto stuff for a while, so I was curious what it used since the statement above was that it only required Python.
Thanks for asking... I used Apple's SpriteKit framework [1][2]. It's essentially a 2D graphics rendering framework that primarily acts as an abstraction layer for OpenGL ES. In addition, it also offers several other "nice-to-have" features with regard to 2D game development (e.g., collision detection, particles, physics, etc.)

Of course, you could do all of the above without SpriteKit. For example, for all of the rendering, you would simply write everything directly in OpenGL ES.

There are also cross-platform options, like Cocos2d-x [3] and Marmalade [4].

Finally, if you've read this far, you might be interested in reading my general thoughts and feelings from when I finished the game [5].

Cheers!

[1] https://developer.apple.com/spritekit

[2] http://www.raywenderlich.com/category/sprite-kit

[3] http://www.cocos2d-x.org

[4] https://www.madewithmarmalade.com

[5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8888107
It's an LLC, isn't it? That means that the LLC will pay capital gains tax when the stock is sold. The government gets its money either way.

The estate planning part is more complex, I'm not qualified to answer that, but even in that article the linked option basically talks about how you can get a 40% discount on the value, but the estate tax basically kicks in regardless once you transfer LLC shares to your kids.

So it's not quite as cut-and-dried as saying, "Zuckerberg just robbed the treasury of $45b"
So why is everyone already assuming Mark's charity is going to be one of the terrible ones? I don't see why he wouldn't give an honest shot at improving the world, as a young idealist. Maybe he won't do a great job at it, but people should reserve judgement til then.
> I've never heard librarians question whether they should be retaining borrower records.

It is the ALA policy that such records should regularly be purged from the system. For example, quoting from http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=interpretations&Temp... :

> It is the responsibility of library staff to destroy information in confidential or privacy protected records in order to protect from unauthorized disclosure. Information that should be regularly purged or shredded includes personally identifiable information on library resource use, material circulation history, and security / surveillance tapes and logs.

You can see some of the effects of this policy at http://ask.metafilter.com/228587/What-are-the-negative-resul... , regarding how some libraries purge their records more frequently, as part of the opposition to section 215 of the Patriot Act:

> The library I worked at would delete the record of what a patron borrowed as soon as the return is processed. ...

> Libraries have long purged patron records

Or from http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2003-07-03/news/030703027... :

> Because of space limits, the Chicago Public Library, one of the largest library systems in the country, long has purged unnecessary circulation records each day and expunges Internet caches every 30 minutes, said spokeswoman Margot Holland. ...

> For years, Skokie's library has purged records on borrowed materials once they're returned. Recently, it installed software to delete records of Internet use. ...

> Sarah Meisels, Wheaton's library director, noted that Wheaton for years has purged circulation records as soon as they are no longer needed, making it practically impossible to comply with the Patriot Act.

> In part because the Patriot Act is so rarely invoked, and also because libraries historically have gone to lengths to preserve patrons' privacy, allowing for the act is almost a moot point, Meisels said.

You say you've "never heard librarians question whether they should be retaining borrower records." How much have you listened to libraries talk about their retention policies to know if they have been saying anything?

Bear in mind also that in the US something like 48 of the states have special privacy laws for library records.
If somebody has a pattern of behavior that is unsavory, regardless of their social standing or wealth, we tend to scrutinize that person.

The same goes true of Zuck. Remember, this is the guy who not so long ago called his users "dumb fucks". I don't think that criticizing somebody is the same as cynically writing them off. It's not like this guy is a god or something.
Ask HN: Any public info on cap tables or employee stock compensation?
Hey all,

I'm starting a company and looking for some guidance on how much equity to offer hires.

Does anyone know where I can find publicly available histories of the cap tables of other companies?
I don't think you understand the reason for not publicizing the shooters' names. It's to remove the notoriety incentive for potential shooters.
How old was he when he said that? 18? I look back on some of the stuff I said when I was 18 and it was a lot worse than this, and I think I'm a pretty decent guy overall. Big difference between a kid right out of high school and a 30-year old.
I hear you. I learned assembler on the PDP-11 -- a delightful memory -- and had the same misconception until I read Ritchie's piece.
These circumstances are no where near the same: Swift is a compiled language, and they carefully made the decision to embed all of Swift and its runtime libraries in your application, allowing them to break things without disrupting existing applications and without needing backwards compatibility cruft in their operating system. They also have essentially been actively discouraging people from writing libraries in Swift by pointing out constantly that there is not a stable ABI, so you only see a small handful of things written for it in comparison to Python.
So introvert vs extrovert?
Bootstrap is way too heavy to build upon for something on the scale of BuzzFeed, for so many reasons. Reimplementing a subset is easy and quick and won't bloat everything up.
I'd say you're making the assumption that it will be used for good, when so many charities are indeed used for tax evasion (and other more nefarious purposes). When you condition these probabilities on how most charities actually operate, and on Zuckerberg's past behaviour, a high level of cynicism proves to be the rational position.
> Facebook does not create value, it merely captures it

Do you really mean that literally?

It is a service which some (not all) people do enjoy using, and which connects people in ways they weren't previously connected allowing for new opportunities, and therefore represents value to those people which did not exist before they had access to the service. It has therefore created value for humans in the aggregate, that is an undeniable and objective fact. One person or another's individual opinion of its value in their lives, or the value it ought to have or not have in others' lives, in no way changes this fact.

I don't know what exactly what you mean by the create/capture distinction, and I'd be really interested to hear you elaborate on this point and define those terms.

But at least according to my somewhat-plain-English interpretation of those words, Facebook pretty demonstrably does both. It creates value by providing a service, and captures value (a great deal more, probably, monetarily, if that's even measurable) from the information generated by people (always voluntarily, because they want to: the key fact to keep in mind) using that service. No?
Ahh, the cycle of bureaucracy[0].

[0]: https://i.imgur.com/tIFidJt.gif
Why feel good about this until you see real results?

Also, Occam's razor. People have a tendency to be selfish.
> No other developed country has such crazy laws regarding charity donations as the U.S.

Wrong. France has the "Association Loi 1901" law and it's pretty much the same thing, a money laundering scheme for most of the organizations benefiting from it - most of the time politicians using public money to finance such organizations where they put their friends and families in charge.

This kind of things has no borders.
$45 billion dollars for me. $0 for the US government. Why did they give me this tax avoidance loophole? Same reasons those "dumb fucks" gave me all their personal information, I guess. It's good to be King.
He didn't say he would give away 99% of his wealth. He said he would use 99% of their Facebook shares to fund their agenda. And he said they would do that with 99% of his shares over their lifetime... if they were 'giving away 99% of their wealth' they could just do that today. As it happens, they can still realize significant returns from those funds in the meantime, and probably end up richer than when they started.

The pattern of manipulative billionaires sheltering their legacies like this is not new; see Rockefeller, Carnegie, Ford, Gates, etc.
While that may be true, he's directly calling people stupid for trusting him. That should give people at least some pause in being optimistic about his intentions.
Mark hasn't been improving the Internet so far (actually FB made it worse in numerous ways), so why do you think he has any incentive to improve the world as a whole ?
If the latter is true, are the praise, good feels and reputation points really called for this early on?
> What's funny is that you could talk to any number of law enforcement officials who believe that the moral failing is on the cryptography community for not providing a "backdoor" into encrypted communications.

There were also any number of people who justified the use of the Atomic Bomb because it lessened the predicted number of losses incurred in the Pacific theater of war. This didn't stop the creators of the bomb from believing it was still better to opt for peace instead of it's continued use to lessen the total number of casualties in future wars.
The key is user namespaces. Unprivileged users can create containers easily via user namespaces. Once the user creates a user namespace, they have root in that namespace and are free to unshare the rest of the namespaces. This is how I wrote 'guix environment --container'[0], a tool for creating isolated development environments using the GNU Guix package manager. The big caveat is that unprivileged users do not setuid/setgid capability, so the number of uids/gids in the container is limited to 1, but I believe that even this is being dealt with in Linux now.

[0] https://gnu.org/software/guix/manual/html_node/Invoking-guix...
If you can't provide enough value to society that you can spare a few tens of thousands of dollars to cure yourself, are you really worth the cost of developing these drugs, testing them, training doctors, etc.?

All of this over-regulation is why medicine is declining in the first place. That shouldn't justify more regulation.
If it gets to the level of bad OP is thinking about, no kid is going to keep it just to do school research projects. You might as well just print out some stuff from the school computers at that point.
No, this guy seems like a real human being. Jurors are supposed to be humans, first and foremost. That's why juries are made up of your peers and not a bunch of legal professionals.

There's lots of "rules" in life, and our job as humans is figuring out which ones matter.
poste.io .. for some reason I am getting error pages
I've never understood that about deducting charitable donations. I've always had the principle that I shouldn't be getting anything for my charity. Otherwise, it wouldn't really be a donation to me. It would be make it conditional. I'm giving this money away, but give me some back from the taxpayers?

I might sound like a sucker, but that's just always been my thought on it. My mother once said something to me like that as a kid and I've applied it donating.
> So what?

So I don't trust them.
Some people change, and some others don't. Please don't assume bad people all change for the best, because it's rather the exception than the rule.
Facebook is abusive of people's personal privacy, even though it is generally an effective tool for improving people's (layperson's?) communication.

So, it's probably a better idea to approach it with a cynical perspective instead of an optimistic (naive?) one. It could turn out to not be estate-tax evasion... however it seems unlikely.
Nothing, but it sure didn't achieve "good deed" status either like your post implied.
Rescue chennai, India
Exactly.

Even to this day, depending on who I'm talking to, I say silly things in private - things that aren't representative of who I am or my intentions in the real world.

It's not fair to look at someones private communications and judge them on it. Especially at 18. It's no way to measure a person.
Shameless plug: I needed to run multiple instances of a binary while limiting the memory footprint (memory + swap) for each instance, so I wrote a launcher that achieves this by placing the process in its own cgroup.

May be useful as a "production" example of libcgroup usage.

https://github.com/geokat/cgfy/blob/master/cgfy.c