skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not many, but even so, this is never the right question to ask.

That question would be: what programs are written in <LANGUAGE> that couldn't benefit from being rewritten in another language?

And most often, the answer to that question is none.

Because languages matter a lot less than language fanatics want you to think.

As for Lisp, I used to be a total fan until I realize the importance of a sound static type system, and now I will never go back. Lisp will never go anywhere because this is the 21st century and we know now that static type systems are an absolute requirement for modern programming.
GitHub hires SJW to work on anti-harassment
That is actually the post that got me into event sourcing / streams. As far as user analytic type events go this makes complete sense to me. What I haven't been able to discern is whether its useful to use this architecture on a much much smaller scale for things that may not be user events.

I love the thought of throwing everything into a stream and populating the read models, analytics, search index, etc with the data. However, for example if you had a CMS / ecom for a smaller organization, should the admin actions also be events? If you have an event source db, they would have to be, and you get all the benefits outlined from the article.

At what point do you decide what to put in the stream and what to build without? Are there events that should never be in a stream? Those are the questions I have been researching but I haven't found a lot of resources or discussions around making these decisions.
Something nobody has mentioned yet is that, in the C-style version, the precedence rules are eliminating some parentheses. You can't do that in Lisp (except maybe with a macro). But then, in Lisp, you don't have to remember precedence rules.

In this example, the advantage is on the C side, because pretty much everybody who knows any math knows that multiplication has precedence, and they can just read that syntax. If you have to go look at the precedence chart in K&R or Stroustrup before you know how to parse the expression correctly, well, then the Lisp approach is probably more efficient...
The basic problem with the "original formulation" of civil disobedience is that power structures have evolved to thwart it.

Things that should by any right be a civil case or misdemeanor are instead charged as multiple overlapping felonies in order to coerce a plea bargain, which is effective to deter all but the most dedicated from demanding their day in court. Then the court won't allow you to make the case for jury nullification or any other argument that the law is wrong to the jury, and prosecutors will be allowed to exclude anyone from the jury who is sympathetic to the idea that juries shouldn't convict when they don't agree with the law.

You can only make the case that the law is wrong to the judge, and no matter how stupid the law is the judge can only agree with you if it violates the constitution. Which plenty of very, very stupid laws clearly don't, so you become a convicted felon without having had an opportunity to make your case to anyone with the power to do anything about it.

In theory the outrageous nature of that process should inspire the public to demand change, but have we passed Aaron's Law yet? [1]

[1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/aarons-law-reintroduce...
Nobody knows. That would be for the unelected judge to decide, which is what makes this all so scary.
I think DirectTV is stealing dish customers. I doubt Dish's consumer offering will be around much longer. It's got so bad that they are going to be releasing a set top that supports netflix this year.
I'm pretty sure AT&T has spent more money over the last year trying to get me to sign up for Uverse then I would've sent them to pay for a year of the service. I got a mailer every three or four days, and had salespeople knock on the door every few weeks. Plus a random scattering of inserts, stuff hung on the door etc.

I can't think of another marketing campaign that's been quite so aggressive.
Launch aborted
I'm not particularly concerned about FBiOS for the pre-Secure Enclave iPhones. I'm concerned about the precedent of allowing the security apparatus to demand the creation of new surveillance/investigative tools, as long as they whisper the magic word "terrorist" 3 times before asking.
This engine design is, in fact, 2-stroke according to the article.
I think it's pretty obvious that Cook's statement is speculation. Why "call him out" on it? I think his speculation is actually fairly plausible, but even if I didn't, it's certainly not out of place there.
Zuckerberg scolds Facebook staff for defacing Black Lives Matter slogans
shortsighted argument.

With digital technology, proliferation is magnitudes easier than something that involves a physical object without involving digital computer technology.

The risk profile is entirely different...
Ah, but you haven't seen the SF bureaucracy, corruption and NIMBYism.
But firmware updates must be signed by Apple, so decompiling the update doesn't help much.
about ten years ago, Scott McNealy got in a lot of crap on slashdot for that comment.

it sucks that he was right.
Congratulations! Great product, and sticking it out for eight years is one heck of an achievement.
I have a question for the lawyers on HN. Why doesn't the judge in the case hold Apple in contempt of court until they modify the OS, in the same way they would hold a reporter in contempt until they revealed a source?

In both cases, you have a third party who is being compelled to assist an investigation against their will. My only guess is that there is a precedent set for reporters, but not for computer programmers.
Tough call. It would certainly be one of the most public discussions around government privacy we've had with regards to mobile phones.

Apple would take a big PR hit from being associated with having unsecure phones, but that would also raise the question of whether other phones are any better (or worse). So it may be a wash all around.
The All Writs Act is what gives the government the authority to issue a warrant. This is the tactic of the government to obscure what is really relevant by mentioning a law that nobody will recognize which is nothing more than the authority to issue a warrant.

A good detailed discussion on that subject is here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cvh0YwpnPQo
scrubbed for today :(
Verizon has stopped building out FiOS to new areas beyond those it already has commitments to. They may never make their money back on it.
How does that apply here? The best-seller tag is applied to books that have the most sales.
It's surprising that this is rarely mentioned in this debate. The US is pretty open and tolerant now, but Cook has lived through times where being gay would destroy a career. Even now there are countries where being gay can get you killed, and I'm sure this is part of the reason he's fighting as hard as he is.
What makes this even more outrageous is Disney's history of outsourcing IT jobs.

Previous discussion:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10969721
I wasn't convinced by this bit:

> When I first heard this I was surprised. Can’t we just aim to cut carbon emissions in half? I asked many scientists. But they all agreed that wouldn’t be enough. The problem is that CO2 lingers in the atmosphere for decades. Even if we halted carbon emissions tomorrow, the temperature would still rise because of the carbon that’s already been released. No, we need to get all the way down to zero.

So if we can only reduce them by 99%, we shouldn't even bother?

It seems to me that the closer we get to zero, the more expensive the next 1% will be. At some point, it's not worth the cost to keep going, and we'd be better off looking for ways to remove some of the CO2 that's in the atmosphere instead of just reducing how much we're pumping in. His equation notably omits that possibility.
> Just because they have a tool doesn't authorize them to use it.

Why do you think they wouldn't use it? Of course they would use the tools that are available. The FBI's regular use of "stingray" devices ("IMSI-catchers") has was in the news recently, as just one example.

Law enforcement does a lot of stuff without a warrant. The "exclusionary rule" doesn't prevent them from conducting a search; it only allows the defense to get the evidence from those warrantless searches thrown out. The problem with modern data technology (for both mass surveillance and easy access to private data such as an Apple phone) is that it makes parallel construction much easier, where data found during a warrantless search is laundered illegally into a new search that can be used in a court.

Besides, the FBI has stated many times how they intend to continue accessing phones and other network devices.

> they are a huge company

So you believe Apple should be de facto deputized into a law enforcement role against their will and at their expense, just because they are "huge"?

> Apple can request to get paid

As this will continue into the future (the FBI apparently already has a list of cases in waiting), do you really think the government will continue funding Apple for their new law enforcement role? The government doesn't get to nationalize part of a corporation just because it would be convenient for law enforcement.
I develop our Roku channel - https://channelstore.roku.com/details/61657/curiositystream. You currently need to sign up on our website and link your device. The next release will incorporate Roku billing so that you can sign up directly on the device.

Comments are appreciated!
Write shared logic in C++ and use JNI/JNA ? Or are you asking about something more specific ?
Confession: I am guilty of this. Well, sort of. I actually did write a book, and it did sell more than 3 copies, and now I put "best selling author" on my resume, on account of my book being #1 in its category (sometimes) and #1 on oreilly.com (sometimes).

So far no one has gotten bent out of shape about it (or maybe no one has looked at my resume), I assume because they're smart enough to know that a "best selling" data science book is not on the NYT list outselling Stephen King and 50 Shades of Gray and Hunger Games, it's bestselling among "Books / Computers / Data & Data Analytics" or whatever.

Having put my bias on the table, I have a hard time getting worked up about what this guy did, for the following reason:

"Whoa, you're a bestselling author? What did you write?"
"It's not a book, it's a picture of my foot."
"Oh. That's kind of strange. How many copies did it sell?"
"Three."
"..."

I mean, it's not like there's some kind of special club where "best selling author" allows you to cut in line or anything. Is there? If there is, please let me know.
These stories are not difficult to find.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Thailand+lese+majeste+Facebo...
What's preventing them (or other government organization) from issuing a second court order to obtain the software?
This part is interesting:

Another committee member, Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), later tried again. "Where does this authority end?" he asked Comey. "Can you paint a very bright line for us with respect to where you think that authority ends?"

"I don't think I can," Comey replied. "I'm really not qualified as someone to give you a good answer to that one." When Himes attempted to clarify, asking if the FBI thought its ability to request help stopped with just Farook's iPhone—a position Comey has taken over the past week—Comey again ducked. "I actually have not thought of it," he told Himes. "The FBI focuses on case and then case and then case."

---

Does he really think the American people are that stupid?
Still going to support Canadian cities? I noticed that Zumper doesn't.
Have used PadMapper for nearly every move since I first heard about it.

It sounds like you guys found a good home! Keep at it!
For the same reasons you mention, ICEs are also crucial to heavy-duty mobile robots (see e.g. Boston Dynamics).
Alledgedly, the FBI already has the information (via iCloud backup), or at least had access to the information before an FBI made error.

In any case, Apple has already been known to comply requests to hand over data on an iPhone. If it were simply the case they needed the information, Apple may have done the whole thing behind closed doors.

The FBI decided to bring this case out into the open, and given the reports about even more phones that need to be cracked open, you have to consider that this may have been a move made to force Apple's hand.
This is possibly the most interesting fumblebrag that I've read in a while. It has a few issues which have been hot on HN recently as well as some age-old problems.

The dependence on third-party services like maps, messaging, flight data, etc. is an interesting topic. Services that help you to get up and running in a couple of clicks are awesome at first. But they can become a burden when your usage goes up beyond a trivial amount. This is a great lesson about thinking ahead when choosing third-party providers - either by passing the expense along to your customers or having a roadmap to phase them out when you hit a certain volume.

Another point is the one-time pricing which, in my mind, is somewhat of a ponzi scheme for a business model. I always cringe a little when I see a cool new app with a "one time payment for life!" pricing. You just can't support customers forever with a single lifetime payment unless you are earning revenue in some other way (i.e. advertising). It's easy to think that you'll continue to gain more customers forever, but you're setting yourself up to be crushed by your own success. Unless you're planning on regularly releasing new apps and/or in-app purchases for your customers to purchase, it's not a long-term business model.

Sorry to see the Just Landed go - it looked like a cool app. I think there is a lot to learn from this post so thanks to the author for posting.
Great point. And I think my comment may have implied more of a "this is a marketing play" message than I intended.

Everything Apple has done over the past few years have really cemented their stance on privacy/security as a top priority, even when it means sacrificing some obvious revenue in the short-term.

A more accurate way to phrase this is I feel privacy and security are now a part of Apple's DNA much like design has been historically. It isn't just what the leadership stands for, it is what the company stands for. So when the question arises internally of "how far do we fight this," I'm left with the distinct impression that the immediate response is "as far as we need to in order to win."
How do you know? Any proof/any scientific source, or is it just lore and how you personally feel about this?
Cory Doctorow makes that case all the time. You don't want perfect enforcement because it provides no opportunity to evaluate when the law is wrong. You need somebody to be able to break the law, show what happens and prove that the world doesn't end in order to make the case that the consequences are actually quite alright and we shouldn't have that law anymore.
The article addresses a certain (popular) perspective, not the only perspective.

I agree, papers should be cheaper, but should they be universally free via sci-hub... I dunno.
Harry Shearer did an excellent mini-series three years ago called "Nixon's the One". It's just a verbatim reenactment of conversations from Nixon's tapes ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9HtoWea72A&list=RDf9HtoWea7... ).

There is more than one scene where Nixon talks about how he wants to get rid of J. Edgar Hoover but can't. In another the Attorney General calls FBI agents "the Gestapo".

It reminded me of another tape - a phone conversation LBJ recorded of him talking to another Attorney General - Robert Kennedy. Kennedy talks about how his subordinate, Hoover, was not only not taking orders from him, but was having agents monitoring, writing reports and spreading disinformation about him ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVHnkIPGC6M ).

Forget the FBI monitoring non-violent political figures like Martin Luther King Jr., or Vietnam peace groups - presidents and their attorney generals began to fear their power.

The Church committee was supposed to fix this, but it was stonewalled in many ways, and by the 1980s we saw the FBI revive these political witchhunts again against groups like CISPES, and even groups run by Catholic nuns concerned about the rapes and killings of Catholic nuns in Central America.
Verizon has stopped building out FiOS to new areas beyond those it already has commitments to. They may never make their money back on it.

Given some of the deals they're offering, I see why. I live in a FiOS area and was eager to get it... until I realized that RCN offered 330 Mbs down for substantially less: http://www.rcn.com/330. FiOS is symmetrical, which is nice, but RCN is about $50 per month cheaper compared to FiOS, and upload speeds are not of critical importance to me. FiOS also has lower latency, but, again, the price delta is large.

My impression is also that Verizon makes money off FiOS, just not as much as it would like, but some searching hasn't brought up any good data on it.
Watson has a very superficial understanding of what is being asked. It would be able to tell you the answer based on the data it was trained on but it wouldn't really understand what the question meant or what the response meant. I'm sure you'd have a very difficult time having a conversation with Watson or using it on anything other than Jeopardy style questions.
Yes, but leaks of pre-release iOS software can't be installed on locked phones as a means of unlocking them, so the risk is not nearly the same.

If you really want to carry this analogy to term, fine, I'll concede that you can't be 100% sure that a physical key wasn't copied before you destroy it, but then you must take into consideration the complexity of manufacture and duplication - if the complexity of duplication is high, and you only make one, and guard it at all times, you can have a fairly high confidence (barring ridiculous film plots) that the key you're destroying is the only one.

With digital things, the complexity of duplication is beyond trivial. One copy leaks, and instantly there are tens of thousands, if not millions of copies in all corners of the internet. Physical objects simply do not behave this way.
Twitter Can Only Lose When It Polices Abuse
Consumers can prefer Blu-ray quality while being satisfied with much lower quality. For many, quality of content and selection would be valued over picture quality.
is it admissible (under the current laws) to ask the Company to make a master key?

That's exactly what's under debate. The FBI believes the All Writs Act does allow that, and Apple (and many others) disagree.

The safe analogy is a bit flawed[1], but to play it out, the debate is over whether or not a company should be allowed to build and sell an uncrackable safe. Law enforcement appears to say no, and privacy advocates say yes.

[1] ... since if you build a safe that's actually uncrackable, it's by definition impossible to later modify it so it will accept some sort of master key, whereas adding software to allow disabling the passcode prompt on a phone is doable after it's built.
Battery-powered 737's eh? While it's a nice dream, electric motors are way behind on power to weight ratio, thanks to batteries. We might get there someday, but we would need several stacking 10x improvements in battery tech, and who knows if they exist.

There are still a lot of places where very high power to weight ratio of combustion engines is extremely important.
I just want my car to go fast

Edit: Whoever is down voting this needs to go outside more often
I'm worried about given that they do exist what is the risk to me? What is the likelihood that my account has been broken into?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Not only do I not know what that means, I'm pretty sure the person who said it doesn't either.
Such posts on HN usually get much less upvotes.
Yes and handing over signed code is not something Apple should be compelled to do.
Definitely. We're working on deals with other Canadian sites to get more listings there.
"It's so damn hard to do anything with tweezers and glue that anything significant you do will be a real achievement. You want to document it. Also you're liable to need help in any C project of significant size; so you're liable to be social and work with others. You need to, just to get somewhere."

Oh is it time already for another "C is for idiots" thread from Lisp supremacists again? If Lisp fanboiz were slightly less busy ridiculing the rest of the world over how stupid everyone else is, they might even have had some time to pay attention to silly things like performance and tooling. That might help the adoption a bit more than the supercilious rock throwing that is almost exclusively the tone of every single article/post from Lisp lovers.
I can see something like this being able to work without paying for access to a flightaware api or something similar as ADS-B rolls out fully. A lot of aviation companies still pay hefty fees to tap into ATC data, that will essentially be made free. ADS-B Out broadcasts identification, position, altitude...

With more aviation geeks out there supplying the data, people won't be reliant on centralized sources of info.

http://www.aopa.org/Advocacy/Air-Traffic-Services-,-a-,-Tech...
I might not toss it away all at once, but by the time I'm done with v2, little of the original code remains.
Why Tech Degrees Are Not Putting More Blacks and Hispanics into Tech Jobs
Think of it more like going to a company that builds safes. Not asking them to blow the door open, but invent some magical safe breaking tool (that has never existed) and would then allow them to open whatever safe they want.

Nevermind the fact that the point the safe company success relied on trust that you cannot break into their safes in any way.
That's why I said that YouTube has quite a few bugs in Firefox ;)
It was stated at the end of the Bloomberg article that Bill Gates' position on the issue was misreported:

Earlier this week, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates told Bloomberg Television he was “disappointed” by reports that he supports the U.S. government in this dispute, saying it doesn’t accurately reflect his opinion.

“That doesn’t state my view on this,” he said in an interview on “Bloomberg Go.” “The extreme view that government always gets everything, nobody supports that. Having the government be blind, people don’t support that.”
Palantir Staff Shouldn’t Believe the Unicorn Flyers
Verizon has been steadily selling off different FiOS (and landline) regions to a company called Frontier Communications (see http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/09/verizon-gets-approva... for a recent story about one of these sales progressing).
Not really. We are demonstrating how multiline statements become hard to read in lisp because in practice you can only use function calls to write everything.

Any language where you write an entire function as a huge one liner expression with functionality in nested function calls is hard to read. It's the behavior, not the syntax per say.

What the actual behavior is doesn't matter as much, even if you can reduce both of them to one liners in many languages.

ex:

def get-max-value(list)
reduce(:max, list)
end
"I am poor" is a poor moral justification to pirate software, movies & books. Software, movies and books are written and funded by private individuals, and if you are pirating entertainment its wrong. I'm not the moral police, but "I'm poor" isn't a very good excuse.

The stand I take with Scientific Papers is much different - these papers are backed by institutions which are commonly tax-payer funded or non-profits. As a citizen, you have already paid for the funding of this research and not being able to access that data doesn't seem fair.

It's like if you paid, before hand, to see a movie created, but never allowed to watch it.