skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The alternative

There are far more investigative alternatives than few you have mentioned.

Serving warrants rarely involves "bugs", and warrants are not the only tool available. For example, a judge can order people to produce documents, enforced with the threat of contempt of court. Other witnesses can be found (with any data they bring), and simple observation of public actions can reveal a surprising amount.

> so they'd know they're being watched

So what.

The warrant requirement is intended to be a burden to law enforcement. The entire point is that a civilized and fair society that follows the rule of law prioritizes the restrictions and procedures we call "due process" above the demands and desires of law enforcement.

If letting some criminals walk free is a necessary consequence of the the rights retained by the people, then some crimes go unpunished. Anybody suggesting that we should accept punishing some small amount of innocent people as "collateral damage" is working against the foundation of a free society.
FTA:

>But that financial model requires authors to pay a processing charge that can run anywhere from $1,500 to $3,000 per article so the publisher can recoup its costs.

Edit: also, I don't expect margins of 30% from companies producing very low value. Do you really think that if they'd lower their margin to 0, with prices of around 30% less, everyone would stop complaining?
Nationally-funded research that's published in expensive journals is still very much available to the rest of the world. That's true with about anything that's published...
I've read this so many times I am starting to think this makes sense to the people saying it: "Trump may be [insert whatever], and [policy X] is ridiculous, and [statement Y] went over the line. But [X] won't ever happen, so I don't have to worry about it."

Don't get me wrong, using policy and public statements to judge fitness for public office isn't perfect, but it seems in this case we are substituting policy and public statement with something that has little or no relationship with executing a complex and demanding job.
FTA:
>But that financial model requires authors to pay a processing charge that can run anywhere from $1,500 to $3,000 per article so the publisher can recoup its costs.
Devil's advocate here, definitely not an economist either, but why is devaluing everyone's wealth a bad thing?

Sure, individually it sucks for one's pile of money to be worth less than it was yesterday but it incentivizes one to figure out solutions to inflation - real-estate, stocks, bonds, assets, work more, etc. Also leads people to produce more and not allow a resting-on-the-laurels situation. Overall, big picture wise, the species needs to grow to survive - to obtain the technology to expand outside of Earth. Stagnancy is a deadend death.

Note, I also did not agree with a bailout.
"People determined to communicate without anyone hearing, e.g. to setup their tax-haven accouts-- can do it in 2000 ways."

That's pretty much the argument made against any gun regulation, because pretty much anyone who wants to commit a gun crime can find a workaround.

"including checking suspected bank transactions with a warrant"

Assuming one is not using cryptocurrency like bitcoin to store money and make transactions.
Or middle class children with behavior that annoys their parents.

Well, it's both that and a legitimate medical condition. The problem is that the medication that works for ADHD also works for suppressing childish behavior that authority figures find annoying. Everyone involved are fallible humans that respond to incentives, and often the incentives align for teachers, parents, and psychiatrists to medicate children into compliance.
No, what the Nobel committee did was disrespectful to all those that won that prize for good reasons.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_Prize

Quoting "Obama said he was "surprised" and "deeply humbled" by the award. He stated that he does not feel he deserved the award,[14][15] and that he did not feel worthy of the company the award would place him in."

So if that was his stance he should have refused.
That's a perfectly fine policy, if they want to implement it. Just note that it will increase the cost of every paper, because they now need to pay for open access.
"It seems criminal that a few hundred people at the publishing houses should benefit at the expense of billions' welfare"

To me it doesn't seem criminal. It is criminal, for to keep knowledge in the hands of the few and privileged to the detriment of the majority of all humanity is a crime. But not only does the Industry keep this knowledge to itself, it prevents even those who directly fund it (tax payers in developed countries) from accessing it themselves.

I honestly despise those journals who manipulate the current system for profit, just as I and I believe most anyone, would despise any organization or individual manipulating a system at the expense of the well-being of the many.

And I laude sci-hub and Elbakyan for something I consider a service to humanity.
Also, the documentation is one of the best among all languages I have used
Slippery slope arguments are lame when they start to go like this.

Like, I get you. By allowing X which might actually be OK, we might allow X+1 to happen and that wouldn't be OK. So we must oppose X as a practical matter.

I get the practicality of that.

But when you start opposing X as a matter of principle rather than simply as a matter of practicality that's when you've gone off the rails.
Is It Safe to Work in a Nuclear Power Plant? Interview with Workers in Japan
Except before you either worked for a concert hall, had a patron, or it wasn't your main job. Two of those three options are no longer very viable.
Death Valley could flood if there was some way for sea water to get to it. If the climate changed and it started to rain there often, it could also make a massive inland freshwater lake.

There once was many lakes in this region:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/Pleistoc...
The main problems with tax-funded research and grants is that money is given in return for citations in journals with high "impact factor". As a result, publishers of those journals are indirectly supported by the state. Instead, government or funding organizations should review the results of the work for themselves, but they are unable to do it, because they usually don't understand a thing about research subject.
I wish they would cave and offer a $5 plan for 100gb.

They never will though, it messes with the economics of the business too much as everyone would immediately trade away from the $10 plan.
Couldn't tell if it was an after-effect or not. That's cool!
>Journal publishing has costs

I've yet to see any justification at all for the outrageous fees charged by academic journals.

The only costs I can see are printing/distribution and web hosting.

Typesetting is trivial. Editing is non-existent. Editorial isn't paid. Peer review isn't paid.

Having a nice office and marketing staff who hold university libraries to ransom shouldn't count as a cost.
If most papers can be accessed for free, why would universities still pay?
Yes he did use it for a reason. He used it to make it seem perverse that you would want your information on your phone to be secure. Hes is trying, once again, to put forth the governments position that if you're not trying to hide something, you have nothing to fear.

And quite frankly, yes, I do hold the security and privacy of data as more important than the terrorism song and dance the government is playing. And I do hold that view absolutely.
We almost never say it. I want to say it. As someone who first became politically aware during the post 9/11 Bush era, it's really nice to have an administration in the White House that isn't trying to scare us.

We wouldn't live like that in a Trump administration. We would live in fear.
Yup. But he doesn't understand that criminals will just change to use technology that is encrypted. We just need to share the facts and let people make up their own minds.

What baffles me is that nobody has been able to convince the President of that simple fact. Surely, he must know about Signal and Snowden, and that Signal can easily be downloaded to any device...
Thank you I will try that, especially when I know I'm looking for an article written N years ago.
Except that isn't realistic at all to how people would behave without time zones.

For one, there is no permutation of the multiverse where after abolishing time zones people keep the cancer that is DST.

For two, nobody today just randomly calls other people they are familiar with during arbitrary hours dictated by social normative time frames without expecting conflict. You "thinking" I'll be available from 6 to 10 local time every night does not account for individual behavior. Some people do work night shift. Some people get up earlier, or later, or they go out at night. You can always call people at inopportune times, and it takes personal familiarity with someone to understand their personal time in the first place.

Additionally, you need a conversion right now to call someone on the other side of the world. That conversion is from your current time zone to theirs. It would be obviously expected people in post-TZ world would do the same calculation for unknown points of contact - plug in their longitude and yours and the difference is the hourly offset from your "daylight hours" on average.

Time zones, as they exist, are wholly arbitrary and do not accurately reflect universal daylight hours globally to begin with. You are as often wrong as you are right when you assume their time zone correlates to your waking hours and culturally normative scheduling because the time zones themselves remain arbitrary.

In the real world, post TZ, people would regularly communicate the best times to call you. You know, like you already do now. And for those you are unfamiliar with, you do the same calculations anyway - you find the difference in daylight hours between you both to find the difference in expected scheduling. That never changes, and if anything the math required is less obfuscated without time zones because you don't have all the edge cases when the time zone lines fail to accurately represent daylight hours (as is the case in all the DST conflicts between countries and time zones that obey it or not).
Because there is more friction in setting up an ad blocking proxy, secondly your usage patterns differ from the normal where a majority are almost completely browser dependent
Chrono Trigger is my favorite game of all time. Its images and music have been part of my life since I was ten years old, so I've often wondered how I would perceive it if the experience were new as an adult. Glad to hear that it held up so well.
Isn't Flask made by Armin Ronacher?
Thank you, I think this is a much clearer argument for how to proceed and how to address transparency required in business and satisfies some of my concerns.

I think we may need additional regulations for the political class however. Government communications need to be secure, but I think being a politician abdicates some privacy rights, and IMHO, if you are an elected representative, you either must use some kind of key escrow, or, you must be able to provide access to your communications under warrant, and if you fail to do so, it's grounds for impeachment.

The risk of collusion between politicians and industry is too great IMHO.
As a taxpayer, you already pay state universities to access those papers. If every paper was published as open-access, I am sure the price of open-access could be reduced.
FSF want to be copyright holder for all of it projects code so it's possible to relicense codebase under newer version of GPL. For same reason everyone contribute to their projects must sign CLA.
It's about the same as everyone else: about 15 USD per paper, e.g.

https://dl.acm.org/purchase.cfm?id=2756548&CFID=761526954&CF...

They also have a somewhat restrictive licensing on their software:

http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/softwarecrnotice

This part is kind of weird, as they have a noncommercial clause on their copyrighted algorithms, which makes them non-free.

On a slightly different note, I was somewhat saddened by how the International Lisp Conference talks were recorded but unavailable because the ACM will not allow their publication.
Journals don't buy the science. It's given to them for free from scientists in return for "prestige". Most of the time this is damaging to their government's interests, since they give away taxfunded research usually to a foreign entity.
Would agree, but I'm not confident in his chances of defeating "the chosen one"...
Based on the title of the post alone, someone with even center to left politics should expect to get jumped on in the following discussion. It's a post that's trolling for conflict, not solutions.
The first fact you need to deal with is that open access journals, started to explicitly counter the cost problem, have similar costs. If it was as simple as you think it is, open access journals would be much cheaper. (Arxiv is not peer reviewed, and does not count.)

The second point is that publishers costs are around 70% of revenue, as the article says margins are around 30%. That means there's a limit to how low they can go and not lose money, and I doubt many of those complaining would suddenly stop if prices were 30% lower.
Posting in a seperate comment here as I was mainly aiming to provoke debate with the original one.

This generally chimes with my feeling. It seems to me that the users of research can derive vastly different value from it and so the flat price model doesn't really work.

Consider some new research on light emitting diodes and the value Samsung might get from that vs. me reading it out of curiosity.

For that reason, to me it makes sense to treat academic research as infrastructure and have free access to all funded via taxation.
I don't think it will happen due to the impossibility of actually enforcing it, hence "effective manner" in my OP.
DOM99 Simple HTML manipulation for the modern web
Welcome, Robot Overlords. Please Don't Fire Us? (2013)
Just from Redmond's commentary, killing white in the center is just one of the outcomes that Alphago was impelled to achieve. [for just an arbitrary example] If Alphago killed white in the center but lost the bottom and the top right, it could have still lost. (and Sedol had to acheive multiple objectives also, of course).

Sure, maybe Alphago missed a winning move. But the situation was fluid both strategically and tactically, which might have been why that machine chose it's losing move and moreover, why I don't think it was just a matter of the machine failing to find a kill - especially since I think computers have been able to beat humans on pure tesuji for a while now.
I'm pretty sure both pronunciations are acceptable.
You don't become a billionaire without having deeply entrenched political and business connections. Donald Trump may be "self funded" but I don't believe for an instant that his persona is any less calculated than that of any other politician, or that his agenda is entirely his own.

Because he is a politician, and by definition a very successful one. Just because he wears a red baseball cap and is willing to use vulgar language and encourage violence at his rallies in the name of denouncing political correctness doesn't mean he's an anti-establishment maverick and hero of the common man, or that anything he says is sincere. He's simply found a gimmick that works.

To his credit, it seems to work extremely well. But that doesn't make him qualified for the office.

Ok, it might, to a degree because it's a political office, but... he seems like a charlatan. I don't understand why people trust him, he seems like the most obviously political figure in the entire field.
Does he take for granted that the mind == the brain? Because that seems philosophically tenuous to me.

> For the body-mind interface, if any, is far from simple. Certainly the mind is not the only factor that organizes, unites or directs the body. The body manifests perfection at its conception, and in the days thereafter when it is still a microscopic embryo that could hardly be said to possess a mind its
developing blood and immune system also react directly and independently to throw off poisons or diseases without any knowledge or known mental influence.
-- Guy Murchie, The Seven Mysteries of Life

We were all doing "intelligent" things well before we had brains...
I'm not so sure about all this. Bernie's been in Washington for decades as a Congressman, so he's been exposed to the same stuff, and his worldview is completely different from Obama's. Before he was elected, Obama had very little experience in Washington; he didn't even serve a full Senate term, and mostly voted "present". He just told us what we wanted to hear, and didn't have much of a record backing up his rhetoric. Hillary, by contrast, has a lengthy record, but it backs up all the worst actions that Obama has shown, but worse. Bernie has an even lengthier record but unlike Hillary there's no indication of corruption and his record is pretty much all good from a liberal perspective.
You act like his entire life hasn't been "executing a complex and demanding job"? Running a small business is hard enough, I can't even imagine running an empire.

Trump has been one step ahead of every last person this entire election cycle. It's been fascinating to watch and I'm done doubting him, underestimating him, or second-guessing why he does or says anything. Now I'm simply at the point where I'm just trying to learn from it, because there are lessons for any business owner or public figure inside.

In fact, if he were to win, I'm not even convinced [X] "won't happen".
Snowden: US Intelligence Programs Don't Help Fighting Terrorism at All
Right. We need to inform each other and our representatives how we feel about this issue, and support our argument with facts. There is a lot each of us can do. I suggest focusing on the security and economic implications of passing legislation requiring backdoors in phones. The DOJ and Obama will not listen to the privacy angle. It must be shown that on balance, we will not be more secure because criminals will just change to use technology that is encrypted, and in the mean time we will have placed our user data within reach of hackers everywhere via a government-imposed weakness that phone makers like Apple will never be allowed to fix. They'll be required by law to maintain such a weakness.
Show HN: Stacktical, a scalability prediction platform
Hi guys, we're Wilhem from Paris and Jean-Daniel from Tokyo, software engineers with a passion for all things cloud (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS). We recently decided to tackle the problem of Capacity Planning with Stacktical, a Scalability Prediction service (https://stacktical.com).

For a decade, we've been observing our clients and colleagues trying to nail down their strategy using repeated cycles of defining, collecting and interpreting load testing campaigns.
It's funny how most people don't realize how demanding the work of infrastructure managers and their teams really is...

While we've made great progress in the field of Continuous Delivery (we're huge Docker fans for instance), getting actionable scalability metrics remains a daunting process that is far from being streamlined.
It has a ginormous operational cost that defies one of the main purposes of scalability: the ability for a company to fit the increasing and decreasing computing needs of apps so accurately that it never under or overspend its hosting budget.

We think we can do a better job by leveraging predicting technologies to do most of the heavy lifting involved in answering the question "Will my application scale?".

To do just that, Stacktical can generate a Scalability report with tons of useful insights within seconds, using just a dozen load testing metrics. For example, we can tell you how many max concurrent users your application infrastructure can handle before starting generating bad performance (or being down altogether!) due to the fundamental penalties any server is subject to (serialization, bad inter-processus communication, suboptimal caching etc).

Our prototype is up and running at https://stacktical.com and we're looking for people willing to try out our solution and help us getting ready for primetime.

Can you guys give us a hand on that regard?
You can signup for our private beta at https://stacktical.com/signup

Thanks a tons, Cheers,
Wilhem and Jean-Daniel
Do you trust this package?
This article got me to go figure out precisely what Erlang processes are. Tl;dr - they aren't OS processes. So it is still conceivable that an error in Erlang can bring down all your web servers.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2708033/technically-why-a...
Security: they can hijack requests (BT does this in the UK to censor requests to certain domains). I believe some ISP's intercept all queries on port 53.

Privacy: your ISP has a log of the DNS queries you've made. (of course, they have a log of the IP addresses you've made HTTP/HTTPS requests to, so that may be less relevant).
Do you trust this website?
> cryptoanarchy and Democracy are on a collision course

Yes, though I'd like to see your argument for that.

However, the failure mode of crypto-anarchy is perfectly secret digital companies arising, who then proceed to affect the real world for digital currency. (Such as a hitman, or an army of anonymous mercenaries conducting irregular warfare for hire.) So, basically large scale terrorism.

Probably much better than the failure mode of a bit overzealous police state.

> some of the same people who constantly criticize Swiss bank accounts, Cayman island financial shenanigans.

That's their shortsightedness. There are ways to tax that don't rely on looking into people's bank accounts. And a lot of the current expenditures could be replaced by projects that require proof of payment. So, you need to show a proof of payment otherwise no school for your kids, no healthcare, no pension, you can't use public roads, etc. And people can vote to enforce collection of money, just like now, foreclosure and repossession works on physical things.

> companies

People can vote to make records keeping mandatory (just like now), and employees have it in their interest to get things in writing. Otherwise they (also) go to jail if they did something really stupid. (It was an order is not an acceptable defense for some time.)

> Will Democracy be able to audit nothing of the interactions of citizens or our institutions in the future?

As it was unable to do so before digital records. And as it is unable to do so for criminal organizations.

And since cryptography exists and computing is becoming more and more accessible, it's getting easier and easier to maintain a secret organization with a secret ledger.

So, all in all, it's a bad thing to rely on those backdoors. It's not even a stopgap measure.
The Blood Harvest
Everybody says that though.
That's mostly an issue for those using VPN services. I should have made that clear.

Otherwise, it's mostly about how mistyped URLs get handled. Some DNS servers point mistyped URLs to neutral "did you mean?" pages. But others redirect to sites that pay for the service. Even worse, there's the possibility of outright MitM attacks.

And then there's censorship. Hit https://thepiratebay.se/ and see what you get. And that's just a torrent search site. To reach some sites, it takes some work to find a DNS server that will give you the IP address.
What benefit do the publishers provide to anyone? Why do the publishers deserve billions of dollars?
Oh right, whatever Kenneth Reitz did then