skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are more ways than just the DOM to render text. And I didn't claim JS was faster than C, I said JS on modern hardware is faster than C on 10 year old hardware. Yet we still managed to run text editors "fast enough" 10 years ago. Finally, I made the specific point to say that Atom is not a good example of what should be possible in JS.
This sort of public spying has been documented since at least 1959.

This _particular_ public spying was reported at least since 2012.

http://post45.research.yale.edu/2016/02/eavesdropping-in-the...

"In July 1956, the Pennsylvania Bar Association Endowment (PBAE) commissioned a comprehensive study of "wiretapping practices, laws, devices, and techniques" in the United States. [..] The man appointed to direct the study was Samuel Dash, a prominent Philadelphia prosecutor [..] The result of Dash's efforts was The Eavesdroppers, a 483-page report [..] The book uncovered a wide range of privacy infringements on the part of state authorities and private citizens [..]

While law enforcement agencies were tapping lines in flagrant violation of state and federal statutes, phone companies were deliberately underreporting wiretap statistics to maintain public confidence in their services. While American businesses were stockpiling equipment to spy on employees and gather competitive intelligence, private investigators were using frightening new tools to listen in on wayward lovers and loose-lipped politicians."

http://www.infowars.com/spy-grid-can-now-record-your-convers... (2013)

"The Washington Post recently published a feature length article on gunshot detectors, known as ShotSpotter, which detailed how in Washington DC there are now, “at least 300 acoustic sensors across 20 square miles of the city,” microphones wrapped in a weather-proof shell that can detect the location of a sound down to a few yards and analyze the audio using a computer program.

𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐬 “𝐠𝐮𝐧𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬,” 𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐘𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐌𝐚𝐲 𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟐, 𝐬𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐚𝐫 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝟕𝟎 𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐲, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬. "

--

This quote from the 1959 report sums up everything nicely:

"As Dash told members of Congress on the eve of the book's release, the American public's longstanding disregard for threats to communications privacy had only served to exacerbate these developments. [..]

'Each generation seems to forget the problems of the past and considers this their own unique problem.' - Samuel Dash"
I'm the author of this plugin, I'd love to hear what you all think.

For some background, I've been using this sort of work flow within vim for about a year now and finally decided to make the project more robust and easier to use. I find it helpful to be able to declaratively tell vim how I want to execute and validate my current working project.

Would love to hear suggestions and ways to make this better!
This is similar in English names (though possibly not as strict). Female names often end with a vowel, commonly 'a', male names end in consonants, commonly 'n'. However, short-form 'Mike', 'Sam', etc completely throws that out.

Top Female names
Sophia.
Emma.
Olivia.
Ava.
Isabella.
Mia.
Zoe.
Lily.

Top Male names
Jackson
Aiden
Liam
Lucas
Noah
Mason
Ethan
Caden
Jacob
Logan
Jayden
Elijah
Jack
Luke
Michael
Benjamin
I see this comment as more like diverting attention away from what the government is doing. If the companies' data collection is bothering us, we should regulate it. One easy and onerous data requirement could be to require sharing all data you store about someone with the person when requested. So linked in and Facebook would need to share all the shadow profiles that create about non users but also the advertising signals they store about us. Make it easy and profitable for someone to whistleblow if there non compliance and award them lets say $10MM per non compliance.

OK now let's talk about the government. Remember when China PR put microphones in taxis for the Olympics? Do we aspire to become that?
> At a general level is that not the point of education? If people who have studied economics dont understand economics, the benefits and perils of different economic policies and activities, better then those who have never thought about it, then surely there's something seriously wrong?

Yes, but the people who are are often for "progressive/liberal" economic policies (not to be confused with neoliberal economic policies) are often not in the field of economics.

Krugman and most in the Keynesian school, a "left leaning" school, knows the value of free trade. Yet if you go to other intellectuals in other subjects, such as Philosophy, etc, you will find little tolerance for the ideas of free trade. Honestly, I don't know if Krugman or even Galbraith fit under the "liberal" spectrum anymore, economically speaking, because the rise of Warren and Bernie are not inline the universally accepted ideas of 99% of economists.

Really outside of the school of business on campuses, you will find that everyone completely disagrees with everyone in the school of business about economics.

So no, it isn't because people are "specialized" in a subject and believe they can leverage that on other people's lives or policies. I'm pretty sure that's not quite what Smith had in mind when he spoke of specialization. I believe it is an elitist mindset they the educated are -better- people and -should- run the lives of others, etc through "progressive" policies. That doesn't mean they know anything about the subject of economics or know anything about other people's lives.

Do I agree with some of those policies? Sure, but if you talk to some people on campus their world view is completely paternalistic and illogical.
I can't tell if you are sincere or you are trying to be passive aggressive. We've been talking about raw performance and you ask about trimmings. Also, I'm not going to do your googling for you.
Yes. We are told these measures are taken to protect our national security, but in reality they are meant to protect the government.

Take the ongoing incident with Hillary Clinton's email server, for example. Clinton was quick to support scrapping 4th amendment rights (Patriot Act) in the name of security, but when it came to state secrets, she played it fast and loose (at best). It took 15 years and a scandal before the Secretary of State's emails were finally secured. We started a mass surveillance program practically the day after 9/11.

We are starting to forget we are supposed to have things like civil liberties, and that the exceptions made for wartime only work if war is not permanent. The war on terror has no end. Before terror, it was drugs and communism. The government will never stop coming up with reasons it needs more power.
the attacker became organized crime, usually from Russia and China

{{citation-needed}}

You don't think people bounce through boxes in jurisdictions with cultural/linguistic/political LE collaboration challenges on purpose? I'd wager a fair amount of so-called Chinese traffic is in fact foreign in origin.
The "Neo in the matrix" thing, i think, is the "lisp enlightenment experience" under another name.

Trying not to be some smug lisp weenie about it, I'm going to try to put my own experience into normal english. It happened for me somewhere around the 6-12 month mark of daily lisp study/coding.

You usually start out learning lisp like other languages: you're just trying to learn the syntax of various commands and the quirks of how everything fits together of the concepts (if you've learnt another language) that you probably already know. And a big part of this is laying the foundation of a deep understanding of linked lists, cons cells, cars and cdrs. And after that, you start learning about the identation style available to you as well. And right now, its just another language.

Then one day, you wake up, and you look at code, and some switch you weren't even aware of has flicked in your brain, and it all looks different. Mature lispers read/structure code subconsciously using both symbols and the indentation style to convey real information about the structure of a program, which is why you can really mess with their heads if you mess yours up too much. But there's a difference between being told you can do it this way, and the practice that actually makes you do it, because its not a conscious thing.

Anyway, the reason lispers "think they're neo in the matrix" is because the mental effect this has on you is not unlike that scene towards the end of the matrix where Neo looks down the hallway and his perception of the thing he's been interacting with this entire time just fundamentally changes. Its no longer writing code, that is to say, strings of text. Its interacting with and perceiving the very structure of the programs themselves.

And it is a real psychological phenomenon. It makes you really happy, and its why lispers talk about it. It makes you want to go and shake your neighbour and be all like "Oh my god, I get it, do you see this!"...and of course they don't. They see scribbles on the screen.

The funny thing is, they always say they're Neo in the matrix, which i understand is cooler, partly because that final scene captures the phenomenon of what it feels like, but its arguably summed up in a more lackadaisical way by the character Cypher in one of his quotes from the same movie:

"You get used to it, though. Your brain does the translating. I don't even see the code. All I see is blonde, brunette, redhead. Hey uh, you want a drink?"
Subversive art project idea:

A RaspberryPi(or similar) with a $12 TV tuner software defined radio, and a small database of the various frequencies and bands particular flavours of your local LEO and/or federal TLA use.

I know our local highway patrol, for example, use at least: P25, police issued cell phones, iPads with cellular data, HF radio (at least on rural/country cars), and whatever they use for the data connection for their in-car computers.

Most/all of that would be encrypted, but hey - metadata's a free-for-all according to them, right? I bet if you knew what to look for, you could quite reasonable detect the presence of a highway patrol car when you saw some digital P25, a cellular connection on the bands used by the contracted cellular provider, and I'd bet good money that patterns of encrypted data that things like ALPR systems send would be quite distinctive...

That's all staying pretty solidly at the whitehat end of the wide grey space of "what's allowed". If you were much closer to the blackhat end of that spectrum, I'd also bet pretty good money that sophisticated criminals are already exploiting GSM and 3/4G weaknesses to individually identify cellular radios by cracking the encryption to see the IMSI data. And that'd all be passive and undetectable, if you were firmly in the blackhat camp, active attacks against their P25 radios can (as pointed out) be done for effectively zero dollars.
So if I'm coding up a LinkedList or a Binary Tree today, instead of using a raw pointer or shared_ptr, should i be using a unique_ptr to prevent circular references ?
Nice. I am a bit confused -- before c++17 it is impossible to capture this by copy; is it possible to capture other objects by copy? seems like it is?
If you're going to pass it by const_ref, why not just pass the actual stored object by const_ref instead?
Not really. Hit-and-run situations usually have few witnesses (that's why the person think they can get away with it) and even if there are, for someone to have the presence of mind to get a license number in a hit and run is not that common.
https://www.reddit.com/r/vim/comments/4je4oq/vimflow_declara...
"OpenSSL is 500K lines of code. When an important update inevitably comes out for it, what happens? Are you now updating 10+ runtimes that are 1+ GB each? Do they use differential compression at all?"

Yes. The images are being updated via snapshot (transparent to the user). Just as RPMs can currently be updated with delta RPMs. The Poettering blog post about it that someone linked in another thread is really helpful: http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linu...

It's not an amateur attempt at the problem. It may not be perfect (it probably is far from it for the next several years), but it does seem to have addressed the biggest issues in a reasonable way. We definitely need a way forward beyond the current generation of package managers; Nix has a really cool solution (and I would be happy with Nix getting more traction), and Guix does, too. Docker, on the other hand, which is the currently fashionable option for solving these problems, leaves a lot to be desired, and does fall prey to some of the concerns you raise.
Docker just resolved a critical compatibility issue it had with most reasonably useful configurations of grsec... see https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/20303 which I opened, and https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/22506 which solved it.
The only code that is shared is the build daemon which is written in C++. Guix uses a fork of the Nix daemon, occasionally cherry picking patches from Nix. C++ is a pain, so in the future this daemon will be replaced by one written in pure Guile.
Ok, I admit I hadn't considered Babel (though I was vaguely aware of it) when I looked at literate programming systems. I considered CWeb, Nuweb, Noweb, and Literate Haskell and a bunch of other semi-literate systems. I think my blind spot was to only consider approaches that were oblivious to tooling, things that I could open and read in any editor. That caused me to also miss LEO, as a commenter on the OP pointed out. I'm absolutely aware of LEO and like it, it just wasn't on my mind when writing this.

I still find your approach of interpreting my statements as strictly logical entities to be pointless at best. For the last bloody time, I know that literate programs operate on hunks that can be reordered. I still don't understand how you can think I don't know that after reading the post. Also, was it not obvious that "nobody" meant "nobody else"? And yes, of course I can't be sure that none of the six billion people on the planet has ever read a literate program. (Though if they did and they didn't say anything about it, and they didn't push back against people building crappy quasi-literate systems, are they not like the proverbial falling tree in the forest with nobody to hear it?) It's a rant, dammit. Do you know what that is? :) I'm pissed off at quasi-literate systems that keep people from realizing what Literate Programming can be, and I'm sorry that wasn't clear to you from my writing.

Are there any good example Babel programs you can recommend? I went looking and didn't find anything better/meatier than https://github.com/limist/literate-programming-examples. I'm still skeptical that any sort of typesetting system is of much benefit; if I have to render in a split screen that's one less window for me to open code in, most likely I'll be trying to get by just reading un-rendered code. I think code should be WYSIWYG, because the slightest rendering step is overhead at the scale programmers deal with text. If I had to constantly render λ out of \lambda I'd never use it. But now that my terminal can render unicode sanely I use it all the time. Racket's Scribble system suffers the same drawback (Racket's ability to render Latex that you pointed out is utterly irrelevant in the context of this thread, without Scribble's ability to reorder code).

Anyways, if you'd send me some example Babel programs I'd love to give it a try.
Ah. I have an app for my main Google account but for other Google accounts, I have them sent to my Google Voice number. (:

Mostly because I'm lazy and want to copy paste from hangouts on the computer.
>>Well, not really representative of Asians at large then.

I didn't tell that I am representative of Asians. I did tell that thing to emphasize the fact that I am NOT a westerner English speaker.

>>There are always people that adopt a new culture and frown upon their old culture -- there's also whole thing called "internalized racism" -- feeling your ways are inferior to those of the dominant culture.

Then I'd say that there are people who like to cling to their cultures/ways however rotten/backward their cultures/ways/customs might be just because they become emotionally attached to it.

Meaningful progress can be made only if we look at our ways (cultures/customs) critically and if require throw part/whole of it away. Today there is so much knowledge available in English that if a person (or better any sizable group of people) adopts English language, he/she gets huge benefits out of it.

>>outside businessmen and techies exchanging business communications and technical information.

Most of the societal progress happens due to technical innovation/progress and business communications. Here also English dominates the world. Take for example the Wikipedia. The English one dwarfs any other language wikis.
> I hear things have gotten better in Frankfurt and you only have to provide an email address. How did they skirt this law?

By being run by companies that claim to be ISPs. What exactly counts as an ISP is at the core of the entire issue, because ISPs are protected from this. A company which only exists to provide internet access has a better standing (and better lawyers) to argue that it is an ISP, compared to a private person or a coffee shop owner.

Most coffee shops I use Wifi in thus have access points provided by such companies. They offer AP/captive portal etc as a package and send the traffic through their systems, taking responsibility for it. (for good measure, some of them probably send the traffic out to the internet in other countries, to make it harder to harass them over it)
It's currently throwing an application error.
What do you want to work with specifically? Web development would be rather easy. Do you have a CS degree?
The split between the F-35 vehicle systems and mission systems is described in [0].

"This new design approach breaks avionics into two categories: mission systems and vehicle systems. The former includes tools that help the aircraft do its job, such as sensors, displays, and weapons. The latter are subsystems that help the aircraft function correctly, such as power generation, cooling, and flight control."

For more on the Vehicle Managment Computers, see [1], particularly:

""Each F-35 will have three boxes, making it a triple-redundant system," said Tom Burbage, executive vice president and general manager of the Lockheed Martin JSF program. "Each box 'votes' and compares its decision with that of
the others before executing a command -- a process that takes place in much less than the blink of an eye. If one or even two boxes were to be damaged or malfunction, the aircraft would continue to operate normally." The all-digital VMCs, which save weight and space while improving precision, are at the heart of the distributed F-35 Vehicle System."

When we say "Block 3i" we are talking about the mission systems hardware[2] and software that are all about "sensors, displays, and weapons". All I intended was to point out this difference, and to point out that the vehicle systems are controlled by physically distinct components and simply saying "The F-35 software" isn't completely accurate.

You'll note I made no claim about safety, nor do I intend to do so. Future performance of the system does not necessarily depend on its past performance. Allow me to point out,though, that through 50,000+ flight test hours, no F-35 has been lost through a flight control failure (again, no guarantee that there isn't some latent failure case awaiting discovery!) And, as an engineer who is struggling to tame some complexity on a rather bothersome flight test instrumentation system, I'm well aware of risks (I love Risks Digest!). Heck, check some of my post history, I'm often exhorting people to read John Gall's Systemantics and heed its lessons.

Discuss technical failings of the program if you wish, but remarks about the "record of this team" and a google search to "f35 failed project" are rather offputting and are, in my humble opinion, needlessly negative.

[0]: http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/print/volume-14/is...

[1]:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/first-lockheed-marti...

[2]: http://www2.l-3com.com/displays/pdfs/redesign/ICP(2011)_LR.p...
That would be pretty impressive, considering the only data structure included in scratch is a list, and it's pretty cumbersome to address.
Clinton winning in November is far from a sure bet, IYAM.
Code like your example would have been broken by real standard library implementations very early in the piece, because even a forward-copying implementation that does word-at-a-time copies (a straightforward and obvious optimisation with real and significant benefits on many machines of the era) would have broken it.
Atomic memory accesses do not require touching DRAM in the general case. The cost of an atomic operation on a modern Intel CPU is closer to 20 cycles than 100. You will see higher costs if you have two processors trying to access the same shared object concurrently, of course.

Your point is still valid, though -- a shared_ptr should be copied only when you actually want to increase the reference count.

In general, I try to avoid shared_ptr unless I really need reference counting. unique_ptr is much easier to reason about and is much more efficient.
That's the core of the legal issue. ISPs are protected, it's not clearly regulated what/who an ISP actually is, and the courts generally haven't granted the status to private/on-the-side providers.
I don't think that's the case here. Many of your dynamic libraries will exist in the runtime (which is a mini-OS image).

And, as dependencies shift, snapshots of that runtime will allow packages to keep talking to the dynamic libs they need, while others that may upgrade to require newer deps will get a new OS image. Snapshots allow them to be small (a fedora-24 and a fedora-24.1 image might only need 1.1 times the space of fedora-24 alone, and adding fedora-24.2 might only need another 5% of space).

I think folks are thinking this is like Docker. It isn't. It has surface level similarities, but it seems to be trying to solve the kinda of problems that Docker does not attempt to solve, and attempts to keep many of the good ideas from past package managers that Docker (and the like) have thrown away.
Yeah, it's a couple of years old, and I too am a bit embarrassed when I read it now. It was a rant, read it as such. I find Literate Programming to be strictly an improvement over conventional programming. But "quasi-literate" systems to beautify programs aren't really Literate Programming, and their benefits are more questionable, since they pollute what the term means and keep people from realizing what Literate Programming can be. That's my frustration.
Yes, but my point is that this is done in the interest of national/international security (there is no financial incentive for the government).

Corporations do their monitoring purely for their own financial gain.

The government is like a parent watching a child to make sure that the child doesn't get hurt - The interests of the parent are aligned with those of the child. A corporation is more like a pedophile - The interests do not align.
F-35s have ferried across the Atlantic without difficulty, and across the continental US on numerous occasions.
I think for self referencial data structures, passing them by a const& unique_ptr is a reasonable way to do it.

Thanks,
Deb.
There's one thing severely lacking in lisp: compile time type checking!

IMO Haskell has the best typing system I've seen in a language so far.

TypeScript is probably a close second (it kinda has to be as flexible and powerful as possible, to accommodate as much existing javascript code as possible).