skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
in a lot of cases, the majority i would say, dependency management is not very useful at all.

stuff like cocoapods, ports etc. all of it are just another pit of tar to crawl through before you can press a button to build. sure you can bury it all under scripts, but the simplest solution imo is to avoid the problem altogether, set up your dependency, or component, or whatever in such away that you can check it into source control as a submodule, script, actual source files etc. then make sure nobody has to think about it again and that updating it is trivial provided the third party doesn't make breaking changes.

not such a useful approach if you want to be building against the latest greatest and need the latest fixes constantly for security etc, but that is the exception rather than the case.
> Microsoft got drivers under control with the Static Driver Verifier, which uses automatic formal proofs of correctness to determine whether a driver can crash the kernel. ... Linux has no comparable technology.

That's a pretty cool idea (also similar to the static verification in NaCl.) Is there a reason one couldn't implement a static verifier for Linux drivers? Would the problem be harder in any sense for Linux, because of e.g. number of exposed kernel APIs? Or could a static verifier "read off" the kernel's API with no manual annotation required?
> But let's not pretend that "it just works, right out of the box!"

It does though. Get an Ubuntu laptop from Dell, it works. Get a Chromebook from Google and friends, it works.

Yes, install Linux on a random 5 year old laptop, and you may have problems. Ever built a 'hackintosh'? Same deal. Ever install Windows? It's a pain.

As for shell commands, Windows has that. So does OSX. Linux also has GUIs that can install packages, that can change settings. The shell is quick, but it's not the only way.

You have to compare apples to apples. And the fact is, if you install a popular distro on popular, well supported hardware, it does work. If you buy a laptop/desktop/server that comes with Linux, it works.
It's a bit meaningless to talk about the corporate tax rate when there are so many deductions available to businesses.
Worked for me using Ad Block Plus.
With all of the back-and-forth in this Adblock War, is anyone verifying these new extensions that can MITM you from your browser?
That is so crazy to me. Why do they like the gull?

I remember when we moved to California I thought ice plant was really cool looking and loved it, until someone told me it was a much hated invasive species that's killing shoreline plants.
Thanks, newbie here... EDIT: now #5... uhm, maybe the algorithm may consider the word 'death' and/or 'suicide'. There was more attention about 'proprietary source' Steve Jobs's death. Fuck. Shit. Merda.
> Do you seriously believe that we can (or should) reach a point where nobody can be identified or located?

People believing such a thing probably don't understand the fundamental nature of reality. Everything forms a web of causality; all your actions spread outwards at the speed of light, affecting everything else around you. Quite often one can correlate back those effects to their original cause. This is what science does - figuring out new ways to correlate observations with their causes. Progress of technology only means we're getting better at it. I don't see how you can revert back to the pre-industrial levels of privacy without rolling back the industrial revolution.
The threat of possible disruption from an uncertain direction 10 years down the line is of a very different nature than the threat posed by direct, immediate competition. Why do you think it's "lazy" to find one type of competition less desirable and then notice and complain when certain markets seem to consistently gravitate towards it?
Radical transparency, David Brin style. Our runaway technology has made the panopticon inevitable. The best we can manage is to make sure we watch them as much as they watch us. That's what wikileaks was trying to do, on a small scale. (Anyone up for an open-source, freely-accessible ANPR network?)
> There would be no reason to presuppose that it would be better:

Sure there, it's been said multiple times; those still writing software would be the smartest around. That alone is reason enough to think the overall quality would be higher; if you don't believe that, then imho you don't know what overall (average) means. You're not listening, you're focusing on outliers and I'm taking about the mean. It's a valid logical inference that if you weed out less intelligent developers by making developing harder, that the average quality goes up; not the absolute quality, the average, mostly because you'd be weeding out tons of bad developers who write tons of bad software. This really isn't debatable, it's logic. Weeding out the bad raises the average quality, there's nothing to argue here, that's just a fact.
I agree. Part of what I'm pointing out is that AOL's user base has decreased so much that something that would be newsworthy about 6 years ago, isn't newsworthy at all today. I think this is even odder, because there are still high-profile hacks of AOL accounts. A good example of this is when the director of the CIA had his account hacked. https://www.grahamcluley.com/2015/10/cia-boss-personal-email...
(from the video)

It looked like they found an exploit via whatever app renders the userguide.html

Curious if they used a proxy to instead load a "malicious" page resulting in a buffer-overflow.
His argument also necessarily presupposes that you're never going to use a debugger to root out latent bugs, that is, you're only using a debugger because you've just written some buggy code and and you're trying to figure out where the problem lies. Which is silly. There are bugs in the kernel right now, there were bugs when that was written (he even alludes to it, but seemingly fails to understand the implication of it), there will be bugs introduced in the future, and someone at some point might like to find those bugs.

Some of the best "What is the worst bug you ever encountered?" war stories are cases where people end up narrowing things down to a bug in what they were previously treating as bedrock.
Corporations are trying to keep their own money. Hiring top notch lawyers is economical because they actually help them save more than what the lawyers get paid. I dont see how fault lies with the corporations.
On an individual level that would be leave the UK - brain drain.
Because corporation tax is a tax on profit. Profit is roughly revenue - expenses. How do you ever reliably calculate Google's expenses for the UK? It's basically always going to be a pseudo made up number between total world wide expenses and 0, and shockingly they declare the highest number they think they can get away with.
Have you actually found that to be a useful thing to believe -- "I'm a success as long as I can get out of bed...?"
Facebook was doing you a favour and you try desperately to stay on their platform. Are you insane?
There is nothing moral about paying taxes. What Apple has earned belongs to Apple and in ideal world it should pay nothing to US government. US government should probably think of simplifying and lowering the tax to the extent that avoiding it becomes more expensive than paying it.
Plague of locusts in 1848; seagulls appeared and ate the insects. It's remembered in the region as a miracle.

ETA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_gulls
If we're really aspiring to a post-racial society, shouldn't having a white male VP of diversity be OK? Progressive, even. What is the author trying to say, that white men can't fill that role as well as a black female?
I agree with you and I'm updating my post to show that your position and mine are similar.

We both want a reasonable tax structure. But Apple is exploiting the unreasonableness of the tax structure, e.g. by using outdated codes, shell games, tax havens, etc.

Apple leaders have the opportunity and moral responsibility to stop exploiting, and start helping.
> you let it it it might turn ugly

Or some friend/acquaintance sees it and pays the guy a visit. But dang's comfort is more important, isn't it?
> Wrong, the fine is a consequence of breaking competition laws

I assure you, the cost of breaking the law is factored into a spreadsheet somewhere in all corporations of note, and that this metaphorical spreadsheet is always used to make decisions.

The OP is absolutely correct when he says that fines are the cost of doing business. He's wrong when he says that this is a phenomenon associated with Europe though -- corporate amorality ultimately knows nothing of national boundaries.
> The problem is that people were being raided based on buying garden supplies.

I get that. That's a big problem. I thought I made my stance on this clear. :)

Don't get confused! The problem isn't the exercise of the right to take notice and note of things that happen in public. The problem is police who perform balls-to-the-wall SWAT raids on people just because they were seen purchasing gardening supplies.

Punish the shitty policing. Make those who were raided far more than whole. Actually punish the people responsible for ordering the raid on such flimsy evidence. Make it abundantly clear that this is behavior is entirely unacceptable and not how police behave. If you don't fix the root cause, the problem will happen over and over again.
Entrevista a um Primeiro Ministro em 10/12/2015
It's just another facet, though. General purpose engines like ElasticSearch can handle that.

For that matter, how many people use site: or filetype: in their Google web searches, and yet those features exist?
Can't remember the last time I had an issue with suspend under Linux (years ago), but on my current desktop I never managed to get suspend to work under Windoes 7. Go figure.
If people are interested in the economics behind these things, I can't recommend this book highly enough:

http://amzn.to/1Vqy2J2

Hal Varian has gone on to be the chief economist at Google.
Em Viagem Oficial a Cuba Um Primeiro Ministro Fala Ao País
The hardest is gathering requirements...
Linux' philosophy (generally open source') is to create a paradise for hackers and it has accomplished that and it should be content at it. GUI desktop is for consumers who are opposite to hackers. Trying to meet both ends are silly ambitions. I am not saying Linux cannot meet the consumer ends, but it need adopt an opposite philosophy from what it starts with. When that happens, some may be happy but hackers would weep (or would they? Wouldn't they just start another paradise?)

EDIT: on second thought, Google's android demonstrates my point.
> Most startups aren't doing anything that special, and so this whole, "We have to move at twice the speed of light or we're all dead!" attitude doesn't belong anywhere.

burn rate/runway is a critical survival factor to startups
White dudes like computers more than other groups. Don't chastise the companies. Teach other groups a love for computers.
Employment is not compensation.
I have that same experience with Amazon Prime videos. I instinctively want to blame Amazon, but who knows?
Let me just replace debugger with supermarket. Hopefully you will see how this is a stupid argument :

One of the insidious things about supermarkets is that they let you be lazy when getting food. When you don't have a supermarket, you need to be more careful about what you do and really understand your food, because a misstep when collecting food can take lead to death. With a bunch of safety nets at hand, you feel like you can just blow out and get some food and work it out via diets later.

There's no doubt that better tools have let us be more productive, but in the process we understand the food we eat less deeply than we otherwise would, because we are required to spend less time contemplating it.

Now do the same replacement for compilers, as they seriously lower programmer's understanding of what happens in their program. Operating systems, because they prevent most programmers from knowing how they're using hardware resources, and therefore lead to suboptimal resource usage.

It's absolutely true what's being stated here. Yet when you apply it to anything else it shows it's utter stupidity. Without tools we are less, it's as simple as that. Doesn't particularly matter what tool you're talking about, debuggers or supermarkets or cars.

Let me tell you the one advantage that producing throwaway "software" that is 3 page webpages, at most, with 2-3 features. The one property this has is that it's cheaper. Due to a horrific accident of history it has an easy and mostly idiot-proof distribution system it also pays more.

I would also like to point out that when desktop apps were the norm, and an environment without debuggers just simply didn't exist, desktop software was large bodies of code where you could fill books with their feature list. In fact people did [1]. Today a webpage with 5 screens is considered a lot. Not doing massive code reuse was considered lunacy, where now nobody does it.

But let's not kid ourselves. Software 10 years ago beat the crap out of webpages and android apps in features, documentation, ... everything.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/CorelDRAW-X6-The-Official-Guide/dp/007...
A better, though still poor analogy is to say "the house keeps falling down when u build it, so I'll use an ultrasound device to inspect every nail as its pounded in to find the one that fails."

Linus, in his own way, is pointing out that an ultrasound will not identify that your house is missing a wall.
Though sometimes the tables are turned: http://imgfave-herokuapp-com.global.ssl.fastly.net/image_cac...
The intro on that song is even better; it's a Biggie sample from an unpublished 1996 interview [some "like"s omitted]:

"Puff [Daddy] told me, the key to this joint, the key to staying on top of things, is treat everything like it's your first project, nomsayin'.
Like it's your first day back when you was an intern.
That's how you try to treat things, just stay hungry."
See also Hotelling's Law

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotelling%27s_law
I assume you do understand the problem that would result if everyone could pursue every possible loophole to the maximum extent like Apple, Google, Amazon, FB, et al do.
> Humans lie all the time. We lie to each other, we lie to the government. We cheat, break rules and break laws all the time.

And this is fucking up things big time on this planet, and maybe it's high time for it to stop.

A lot of the problems you described have nothing to do with privacy, and are entirely because general population is bunch of hypocritical children. They get scandalized. It's a hallmark of a mature person that they don't get scandalized over things, but that they seek understanding instead.

If anything, sudden and total lack of privacy would show everyone just how hypocritical people are. How many of those against sodomy laws visit prostitutes? How many of those against prostitution are homosexual? Not saying that either is wrong - my point is that what privacy does is it creates power asymmetry. I can shame you all day long for your "sins" and you can't fight back because you don't know about mine. I'm not really convinced that the solution to this problem is more privacy.

Yes, telling people to grow up is a tall order, but I hope that as a civilization, we can reach it. And then, privacy will be something that isn't really needed much, and enforcing it only makes things less efficient.

That, and of course total impossibility of getting back the pre-industrial privacy levels while retaining XXI century technology.
Sure. And that complication actually benefits the corporations that have the resources to figure it all out.
The limiting factor will become the local wifi network. I still find that real wifi speeds are a fraction of what is advertised and I know very few people who connect their devices with ethernet.
Link is Slashdotted.

Here is another link to the story:
http://www.osnews.com/story/29023/Amiga_OS_Kickstart_and_Wor...

Apparently the file says 3.1 but it is really 4.
Chiming in on here...

I reverse image searched his Twitter pic, it's a stock photo from an online retail (clothing) store:

http://tineye.com/search/057213bd41c8c6bb258d9f6836bf57e1c4e...
webkit, and yes, probably
I'm not the one who downvoted, but I would imagine this is why.

* Overnight is a bit too quick. Uber's service has grown so quickly partly because they have an organization behind it to fight against regulations which is part of what made their rapid growth possible.

* Implementing a standardized "blockchain" protocol to guarantee all of those things is a non trivial task

* Go outside of SF Bay, whip out your phone with a group and tell them that you're about to order a "distributed reputation system cab" and they're just going to look at you like "wat" then open the Uber app and get an Uber that already works with their credit cards and lets them split the fare. They maybe have heard of Lyft, and most likely have Uber, not the blockchain app.

* Uber has hordes of information available that lets them tell drivers where to be and when, it also prices the rides based on demand. The block chain app has none of that.

* Traditional cab drivers are terrible, the cars smell, they don't show up on time, they drive you in circles to up the fare, sometimes they take off when they hear where you want to go. An app is not going to change this overnight, though eventually the reputation system might change it.

* Rent seeking is annoying but they are still much cheaper than traditional cabs, at least everywhere I have used them.

Maybe it's winner takes all, maybe not. It remains to be seen whether the legal system has just been slow to react to Uber and its ilk or if it will not react at all. I think the end of this in the short run is that Uber takes > 90% of the market, Lyft takes the majority of the rest, and the cab companies continue to operate at a smaller scale with less profits. This is after local and state governments wake up and impose more modern, but less restrictive taxi-style regulations on these companies to enforce some level of accountability for when the shit hits the fan or whatever.

The end of this market in the much longer term seems to be self driving cars and some form of shared ownership. I could see premium ride sharing clubs where you pay more to ride in an Audi or something with common ride sharing clubs where you ride in a van. It is this much longer term that I see Uber having more potential competition.
That blog detailed the WebKit exploit and how they used it to get information about the PS4's base system.

The fail0verflow exploit takes it a step further to "kexec" the system into linux where the linux system has direct access to the hardware.
> it's often enough to focus on forgiveness and compassion, and that there's something bigger and more important than you and your tiny problems

so, would Buddhism also work then?

I've done a lot of compassion meditation (which combined with insight meditation which fills out some more the forgiveness parts) in the past, and I have learned so much from that. Much bigger impact than I got from mindfulness meditation[0]. I did both during my morning routine for a while and was very beneficial. Combined with a weekly sangha (meditation-group) practice, which was absolutely instrumental too. Without that group, I wouldn't have made it my morning routine--no pressure just I noticed some people were doing that and gave it a try. Then there's the dharma-sharing part, which is nice but seems to me mostly a tool for group-cohesion (as well as an exercise in listening without judging), similar to singing songs, but more personal.

Unfortunately I let the morning meditations slip in the past year (circumstances, slipped a lot of good habits, exercise too, slowly crawling back out, shitty year for me). I usually don't do New Year's resolutions, but this is one. I do still attend the sangha, though.

BTW I'm not Buddhist. I like some parts of it, I can bear spirituality (suspension of disbelief and some of it actually makes sense as a metaphorical experience that is hard to explain words), but when it slides into religion (and Buddhism definitely has that, too) it just really creeps me out. You're in a susceptible mindstate, and there are some aspects of Buddhism I strongly disagree with on an ethical(-ish) level. So much when after a particularly religious (almost sermon-like talk by a Buddhist monk) meeting, it even bothered my during my own meditations for a few days because the bad aftertaste kept surfacing.

But that's okay, the group is quite diverse and we all bring in our own themes and stuff. They're also quite literally one of the nicest groups of people I've ever met.

[0] which is also useful, btw. mainly for bolstering focus and both dealing with and letting go of stress. especially the unnecessary stress. but I found I need to do that at least multiple times a week, more like a training, in order to take the benefits with me in the rest of the day. compassion meditation provided insights that sticks longer (but practice helps of course).
I think the world will become more fractured before we go towards something like a one world nation. Unity and Disunity waxes and wanes through out history[1], and now we're near a peak.

[1] For example, 50BC with the Roman Empire, Han Dynasty and this interesting map about Greeks in India, that I found just now. http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/FeaturesFarEast/CentralAsia_Ma...
Yeah. Being happy is stupid!
Btw Im looking for ProductHunt invites in case you got one ;)
A popular article on Ars Technica is entitled: "2015: The Year Microsoft started to get the benefit of the doubt."

"Started." Indeed. But old habits die hard.
A question for both of you. I don't understand how, if you have it together enough to centralize your logging, you need to be told about interdependencies between your services. What am I missing? Do I underestimate how easy it is to set up centralized logging? Or how complex a deployment becomes before you even wonder if you need centralized logging?

I have a centralized logging system, but I can't imagine being so confused about it that I need my logs to tell me that two components interact with each other.

What don't I understand?
Fun read. Not much of a way to run a business though.
Apparently there are very little changes in the Sony PS4 kernel compared to FreeBSD 9. Sony changed some of the parameters to syscalls and added a bunch of their own syscalls.
They using normal webkit exploit there. Reason why they start it via "userguide.html" it's because in any other case browser on PS4 can only be used when you logged in on PSN.

Of course PSN require latest firmware to work while they using device with Firmware 1.76. It's one of Sony measures to force people update firmware.
> I believe that no one really wants privacy, they really want the freedom to act transparently without punishment

In that framework, punishment includes things like "being shunned by a friend due to exposing your personal beliefs". Yet that friend should have the right to freely associate with whom they please. Please resolve this conflict without requiring people conform to your specifications.

> the original problem is about the person and their world according to their morals

You said: "how do we create a world that places everyone in their own private moral world".

I'm asking how you create this private moral world for someone who's moral desire is to force their will on other people.

Schelling points also apply to abstract concepts, like the idea of property itself. Private property is an abstraction we could take or leave, so why do we find it so useful?

A property line, with a fence or without, very clearly delineates who has authority over which square inch. If your neighbor decides to store stuff on your side of the line, they are clearly in the "wrong". They can easily foresee this, so the situation likely does not even come up.