skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If this is the case, wouldn't you also have a responsibility to level the playing field for other web search providers or social networks in addition to Google and Facebook, so a free market is ensured and free speech couldn't be harmed by decisions of individuals within those two companies?
I'm a big fan of NSubstitute. The syntax makes so much more sense to me than Moq, and readability matters a lot in unit tests.
There's possibly enough money involved to warrant provisionally planning to speak with an accountant based on discussions with the attorney.
What you can do while it's open is partially defined by the dwShareMode parameter in CreateFile. Unfortunately a lot of people look at the daunting documentation, shrug, and put 0 there, which is the least permissive mode. A lot of libraries do that too.

OTOH there are other limits that are not dictated by dwShareMode. Such as deleting files while handles are open - this blocks a new file with the same name from being created until all handles are closed. That's probably the worst one. There are some other crappy ones involving directory handles that I don't care to enumerate.
> ...and is more energy efficient per calorie consumed too.

I've read studies in the past that found entirely the opposite, and by a very large margin. If I remember correctly, I believe that raising chickens for meat was many times more efficient, and among common meat livestock cows were the worst.

Are you sure you've got it right?
You don't. It just makes it easier and requires less code.
While the author has an pointed view of the world and how to solve all of these "problems", his answer is basically an Arista switch/router based on the Jericho chipset. Full routes, wirespeed, big FIB, basic software.

But yeah, it's still a router. It's not "carrier grade" big expensive router in the words of Dave Temkin, but it's still a router and will probably smoke the market for lower-end Juniper MX's and Cisco ASR's.
Repeat after me:

"No, officer, you may not see my wallet. I do not consent to a search of myself, my vehicle, or my property. I furthermore, refuse to have any further conversation with you. May I go now, or am I under arrest?"﻿

Works every time for me.
> Well, it's ours.

No (t really).

> We created it.

Yes (mostly, originally).

> We've allowed other countries to use it because it benefits us to do so.

It is a distributed network. It is composed of pieces owned by different principals, content created by different people and code and technology contributed by the entire world. If the U.S. were to close its internet today, and block any connection to the outside world, it might crash the web for days or weeks, but after that, the dependencies on U.S. controlled infrastructure would be quickly replaced, and the U.S. would be left with a national intranet, while the rest of the world would have the Internet. Hell, even for DNS, which is the specific system in question here, it is not so much "the U.S. owns DNS" but "a large number of DNS servers, owned by different parties, have pretty much agreed to replicate the U.S.'s version of the DNS registry and trust it as authoritative". They could be set to replicate a root DNS server in Geneva, Brussels or even Beijing within hours. In some ways, other countries allowed the U.S. to dictate how domains are assigned because it benefits them to do so (and because ICANN has been for the most part a trusted arbiter of the DNS system).

I am not even in favor of a U.N. controlled Internet, based on what I know is likely to happen if this move occurs now (the U.S. is, depressingly, among the least Internet-hostile countries in the world right now... and it is hostile enough). I actually like ICANN and how they do things, for the most part. "If it ain't broken don't fix it" and all that. But this whole "we own the entire Internet because it started here" sentiment is as ridiculous as if, say, China were to claim that they own all of the world printed money because they invented paper money originally.
Some interesting reasons there for first world chicken raising, but I'd disagree with most of them from my experience:

- lock you at home: with an automatic door on the coop (ours free range), waterer and multi day feeder, you can leave them for a week, possibly longer. If we moved we'd just give them away (or well, I'd probably eat them, but I'd be voted down)

- huge garden and social use: We don't have a big garden. They happily co-exist in the garden with our kids and friends running around with them.

- reliably lay: for their laying period chickens that are bred for laying are incredibly reliable. We have four chickens and get four eggs a day like clockwork.

- don't have the time: I spend about an hour a week taking care of the chickens. Collect the eggs once a day and clean the coop on the weekend.

- rats: They do attract rats if you keep their food easily accessible. This is definitely a problem. There are feeders that make this harder, we have one and it seems to work.

- gardening: The gardening thing could be true I guess, but my wife is an avid gardener and she seems to make it work. I think you just change your gardening practices a little. She does like their manure for compost.

- cost of keeping them vs fiscal benefit: this is an interesting one. I haven't done the numbers, but I know people who raise small flocks specifically to make money. I doubt I'm making money on them, but they seem incredibly cheap to raise to me.
If it's "clear" the money result from illegal activity, they will be charged with a crime.
Surely you are not advocating replacing the courts with truthiness and gut feelings?
Call9 (YC S15) is looking for a head of security
Last time I tested this cloudflare validated using the domain name, not the cname.
Not for "GitHub Pages sites created after June 15, 2016 and using a github.io domain."[1]

[1] https://help.github.com/articles/securing-your-github-pages-...
The second image is of IIS running on Windows, not Apache. Different software on different OSes. Regardless, it doesn't seem like parent is making the argument that the NT kernel isn't complicated - just that it is superior.
I'm not sure you need anyone specializing in startups. At this point it seems like mostly a matter of reading the signed documents. At this point, there isn't any reason to layer on complexity.
See here: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/3jhv80/pyparal...

Source: https://github.com/tpn/pyparallel-tefb

Go-specific comment thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/3jhv80/pyparal...
"collateral damage" - these sorts of tricks are not new.
The spines make for interesting patterns: https://www.instagram.com/p/UZdhB/?taken-by=nevrs

(I have every single issue).
What are peoples thoughts on handrolling mocks\stubs? I tend to do that the most and would love a compelling reason as to why I should switch my behaviour.
Solaris event ports most certainly can be and are used for async I/O. I'm not sure how you can claim otherwise:

https://blogs.oracle.com/dap/entry/libevent_and_solaris_even...

https://blogs.oracle.com/praks/entry/file_events_notificatio...

And Solaris, (unlike Linux historically at least), supports async I/O on both files and sockets. Linux (historically) only supported it for sockets. I have no idea if Linux generally supports async I/O for files at this point.
I am just a junior dev with a minimum knowledge of cryptography. This cannot possibly be a unique or new idea. It's literally the purpose of those modules and the purpose of code signing. So what are the business reasons for why it isn't done this way? Some ideas:

0. They didn't think of it, and I just gave them the idea. Unlikely.
1. Resources required to implement this (hardware read-only keystore, crypto primitives in the bootloader, reboot scan time, backup boot image storage space plus incoming image storage space, etc) are too expensive.
2. The possibility of losing the key and having devices they mathematically can't modify without a complete recall and replacement is too terrifying.
3. They don't care relative to the effort to implement it. They talk and litigate like they care, why doesn't this message get carried down to the new product department?
4. Decision makers don't understand the difference between the "security" obfuscation measures they're being sold right now, and potential, actual mathematically secure models proposed to them.
5. They are incompetent to actually build this. They have some pretty smart people, and accomplish other impressive projects, so this seems unlikely.
6. There's a flaw in my scheme that makes it no better than existing methods that can be jailbroken.
My plan for if they ever pull the plug on it is to go back to Ting. Similar idea and pricing.
In the case of a government forcing secrecy on your patent, thus blocking you from public ally commercialising it - is the governemnt then expected to compensate you in return for your loss?
This is my experiment, partly because I want a simpler way to return a request. Let me know what you think :)
Full name: Frederick Bailier Richardson III

Am thinking these activities devalue the terms invention and inventor. Would prefer that to patent some process that you had invented you ought to have to come up with a device to implement said process. You may not even know how to realise your idea in practise which is kind of where all the hard work is. An not saying idea for processes are ten a penny but the bar needs to be raised.
sad but very true
> Doesn't appear to work with custom domains.

Do you have any idea how TLS actually works? If this worked out of the box for custom domains, then GitHub would need to be able to impersonate those domains.

At the very least you'd need a way to upload a private key/cert combo that they could server in response to an SNI request. Given the sheer number of sites that they host (every user effectively has a custom GitHub pages page) that's not really feasible though. Hence only support for *.github.io as that only requires a single wildcard cert.
Playing via telnet to a remote server is the best chance.
I guess you should also mention on each of your comments that you are extremely biased against and paranoid about Microsoft and that you actively target any popular Microsoft article posted here in order to inject something negative, whether it's relevant or not.
Why not simply treat every search that returns zero results as a request, and dump the UI entirely?
Ah yes the era of light pink text on a striped yellow background. The future was going to be just like Max Headroom.
I'd probably have to do a really detailed analysis to see which span of years was more different to me as a consumer--though I think the examples you cite are relatively trivial. Uber, electric cars, long distance fees are all pretty trivial in the grand scheme of things.

But to consider the difference between 1974 and 1995. Consider that in 1974, there were basically no PCs, calculators were just appearing, no answering machines, no way to record television (or to buy/rent movies), no cable, and no cell phones of course.

So no direct use of computers available to the typical person and essentially any exchange of information involved going to a physical place or exchanging information with someone at a specific location verbally.

Even thinking about 10 years+ later, I've frequently joked that if I went back in time I'd feel so information starved that I'd consider doing my job impossible.
I had the same feeling, then decided that DF should be packaged with one of the online wikis about the game.

Don't feel ashamed to look up how to do the game. There is a regularity, but the learning curve is very high. I think it's easier to think of DF like Blender more than like Sim City. You're using a "professional-quality" dwarf simulation tool, some manual reading is required.

I think DF is like Magic The Gathering in a way: Half of the fun is absorbing the mechanics and idiosynradicies of the game. It's fine not to like it, too.
Uber Starts Operations in Ghana with Accra Being It’s 467th City
Kudos. +1 for ostracism of the cowardly amoral shits building and using this stuff.
I didn't mean to say that they are equally likely. Rather, they're all so unlikely that it's really not worth worrying about them.
That would be nice actually
So: Dwarf Fortress in a forest with an aquifer down in the soil.

It takes a year to build a wooden hall large enough for most of the workshops, on one side of the river, while on the other side digging out a collapse to drop soil into the acquifer. A lovely wooden bridge and wooden tile road is the meeting area to keep the dwarves happy while they have no stone.

The dwarf with the only pickaxe falls into the watery pit under the collapse and drowns. I have to wait half a year to trade for another while the dwarves live on fish and berries in their hall. They are haunted by the ghost of the miner, as there is no stone for for a engraved slab in the graveyard. Cherry blossoms litter the ground, and blow into the half-finished excavation.

A crafter is possessed and wants stone, the one thing we don't have. What little the drwarves traded for had to go to other uses. A great pile of wooden crafts is building up. Just as well there are no elven neighbors. The crafter becomes melancholy, and wanders about the fisherdwarves, watching them. Sometimes he stands in the middle of the river.

After trading a new pick, the next miner knocks out the remaining support, and the collapse happens. But, alas, the aquifer is two levels thick! Only one level is smushed dry with the collapsed soil. We trade for rock, build a new structure in the now open watery pit. Two dwarves fall in that season during the construction, adding more drowned victims and wailing ghosts.

The construction of stone walls in the pit is knocked down at the cost of yet another dwarf - yet it isn't enough to breach the aquifer. Woe. The pit is now littered with rock and bodies and materials.

There is only one other thing to do; build a stack of wooden pumps, stairs, landings down into the pit, and an aquaduct to the river. Pump it dry and send in dwarfs to build walls and lock away the water.

All of this and still not at the point of the exercise - to raise a great hollow tower of stone over the river and a deep pit of stairs beneath, and tear down the hall of wood for charcoal. So it continues.
They are extremely protective and jealous of DF. Maybe when they retire, or escrown in their will
Microsoft Edge WebGL engine open-sourced
You might think so, but the Commerce clause has been interpreted to mean that raising food for your own consumption is restraint of trade between the several states:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

"An Ohio farmer, Roscoe Filburn, was growing wheat for use to feed animals on his own farm. The U.S. government had established limits on wheat production based on acreage owned by a farmer, in order to stabilize wheat prices and supplies. In 1941 Filburn grew more than the limits permitted and he was ordered to pay a penalty of $117.11. "

After all, that food you raised for yourself prevented you from needing to buy food from another state, and so, well....
Also all the countries who knowingly let the rendition flights flt through them, including the UK and Ireland
What is missing in your estimation?
A lot of nice practical insights...it helps that real numbers are mentioned (525M requests/day, 37.25TB of total data so far, 5+GB a day) so that we can understand the magnitude of traffic, and good detail (and diagrams) of their setup. The initial setup, with ELB in front of 2 instances, is what I'd expect for a site of much less data traffic...

I was wondering how much of the current data traffic (5GB+/day, 1,500 requests per second) is being borne just by the PostgreSQL database? That is, do the stated data numbers include whatever ElasticSearch handles as well?

The detail of underestimating the field size for the ID fields was interesting...I suspect that would be a mistake many operators would make, but one that a company in Hotjar's line of work would forsee needing to anticipate...was it a simple oversight during the launch phase, or did they just underestimate the magnitude of usage that their service would get?
And, perhaps especially in 1974, after they got over the shock of using an iPhone or modern laptop to access the Internet, they'd be equally flabbergasted to see that voice access to this "Star Trek computer" still doesn't really work.
This is a bit of a simplistic view... Insurance trades a slightly higher expected cost for zero variance in cost.

For small companies, that's a great proposition because a small monthly fee can be planned for, while a patent suit is do or die find very expensive legal support.
Nice. Do you have any issues keeping track of them?
Sorry. I meant client information/conversations
Attend meetups, cold emails don't do much for me when I receive them. If I've already spoken with you, or I've met you - that's a different story.
Assault is a violation of your right to not be physically attacked. The reason for the attack is generally irrelevant. It doesn't matter if it was something you said, jealousy induced hatred, road rage, gang initiation, and so on.

An officer of the law refusing to enforce the law is incompetence, abuse of authority, or corruption. Executive branch incompetence, even criminal incompetence, is something distinctly different than legislative proscriptions that institutionalize through the power of law unwarranted interference in freedom of expression.

There is no need to label all these problems as instances of infringement on freedom of speech in order to argue that they are inappropriate. They are inappropriate all on their own. Mislabeling them just confuses the discussion.
Interesting, his case is in their search tool: https://search.rpxcorp.com/lit/txedce-138585-uniloc-v-lamina...
I know legal protections apply to criminals, but it is hard to win a political battle against the cops who busted a big time dealer of life-destroying drugs (heroin)
Patent trolling issues aside (they're valid, but discussed and I'm just another one of the "software patents suck guys"), I'm surprised that Google doesn't provide protection for developers using the Play Store. It's a very critical service for developers writing code for Android -- though it's not always required it is if you want your app to be seen.

They certainly don't have to and I'm not sure if Apple or Microsoft do or not for their equivalents, but I know Microsoft offers patent indemnification for a lot of things these days. It would be in Google's best interest to have a patent indemnification policy for Google Play store.

I'd love to know what the actual numbers look like but I'd be willing to bet that the costs are extremely low since it works as a deterrent to these kinds of lawsuits. Patent trolls go after these lone developers because they'll settle rather than incur the cost. It's an easy buck. This guy didn't make Google Play, he didn't write the code that "supposedly" infringed on the patent. He simply used it because that's the only way for practical purposes to publish an Android app. And since the patent covers a large set of features that Play uses for licensing, he couldn't have published through Play and not infringed in the eyes of Uniloc. The law allows anyone in the chain (including the guy playing with the Flight Simulator) to be sued for infringement, but they'd be very unlikely to do this kind of garbage if they knew Google would bring their legal team into the fold. By not protecting their developers, Google has a deterrent to people using their platform.
We will be moving our app development out of the UK also
It's likely not the same phenomenon, but I'm reminded of the story of Millikan's oil drop experiment and how the accepted value slowly changed from Millikan's reported value to the curent accepted value.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment#Millikan.2...
What's not to understand? Money is money, it spends just as well regardless of who gave it to you.
Software is not patentable in Brazil either.

Honest question: have anyone seen any software innovation been really protected by a patent litigation? All articles I have seen are about trolls.
Do you use slack? Is that a "web" app or "native"? I think the lines are blurring.
It works fine as in "I can listen to audio on my laptop from multiple programs at once, with a centralized way to control audio volume on a per-application or per-sound-device basis." I literally cannot imagine any audio system doing better than that given the hardware I have to work with.
> Do you have any idea how TLS actually works? If this worked out of the box for custom domains, then GitHub would need to be able to impersonate those domains.

If you redirect your domain to my webserver, I can get a certificate for it. E.g. from Let's Encrypt.

Wordpress.com uses that and offers SSL certificates to "million-plus"[0] blogs with custom domains. It's certainly doable at scale, although I totally understand it not having priority for GitHub (esp if it doesn't fit their current technical setup).

[0] https://en.blog.wordpress.com/2016/04/08/https-everywhere-en...
Thinking Machine 6: Play chess against a visualized AI
Where else would it go? A disinterested third party - not the police department that had the power to confiscate it. The state or a specific public good - i.e.: housing/food banks etc. could work.
He mentioned in the video that App Store apps were getting affected sometimes too, did Apple step in? (I'm legitimately asking, I thought I remembered something about them doing so, but it might have been in relation to a different patent thing unrelated to the store itself).
It's best to just avoid snarky comments completely.
The last Labour government was actually just as bad...They pushed for 90 day detention, ID cards, secret evidence, reducing the number of jury trials, ASBOs, Terrorism orders (or whatever they were called), they collaborated to send people to be tortured in Libya...the list is endless...oh yeah and the Iraq War
There would be no massive pot of gold, because Google would not be a party potentially liable for damages.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11853536
A CGI script to cat the posts together sounds like the better option.

Wasn't this the sort of thing that PHP was literally invented to do? Upon saying that, I have no idea what the state of PHP was in 1999.
There is no Commerce Clause in Africa.
Obligatory mention of pseudoscience in a topic about real science: check. Might as well hail Deepak Chopra as Einstein reincarnated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake
I haven't actually. Although now I'm kind of curious.
As a US citizen, I find it strange as well. But our Republican Party seems to believe we're special and should be treated differently. We aren't and we shouldn't be.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11866581
I think trolls live under a bridge, in either case, it's not a horrible enough place for them.