skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Seems like the DNC does not have a great track record on computer security. The Sanders campaign filed suit on the DNC. Both Sanders and Clinton may have been able to access each others files.

According to CNN, Wasserman Schultz said:
"[The Sanders staff] not only viewed it, but they exported it and they downloaded it... We don't know the depth of what they actually viewed and downloaded. We have to make sure that they did not manipulate the information... That is just like if you walked into someone's home when the door was unlocked and took things that don't belong to you in order to use them for your own benefit. That's inappropriate. Unacceptable."

Maybe you shouldn't leave your front door open.

[1] http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/18/politics/bernie-sanders-campai... .
What's the state of LED growing? Is it ready to take over for HID?
The author's response to this question from Twitter:

I live on 17 acres, so: coyotes, hogs, nutria (and other destructive varmints), recreational shooting.

https://t.co/o0eSUusHXI
Adrian Colyer does something similar with his blog which I highly recommend:

https://blog.acolyer.org/

Every weekday he posts a digestible summary of an influential paper, typically with a link to the paper itself.
I love this game. The storytelling is fantastic and the framing device is really clever and unique.

Even though the final boss fight is extremely lackluster the game has maybe the most enjoyable ending I've experienced.
> Jian Ghomeshi

If you have 40 minutes to spare, I'd be interested to know if there are any remainings criticism of that case other than those that get demolished here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRyt5FhrBEk
> seems horribly

No physicists here but you don't seem to be either. Irc from what had been said with the first event gravitational waves pass through matter and aren't disturbed like em waves, that's why they supposedly open new doors. Secondly, just take it at face value, if they say so it is so, it might seem improbable and "horribly prone to manipulation" but they probably thought of that and have machines precise enough to compensate for whatever effects you or me imagined e.g. "LIGO is designed to detect a change in distance between its mirrors 1/10,000th the width of a proton"[1]. It's like your grandma, never having touched computers, expressing opinions on the next release of some developer tool.

[1]https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/facts
Thank you for writing this article. On balance, I disagree with the justification but it's so much more clear and thoughtful than the popular discussion about gun rights from either end of the political spectrum.

Hooking into the "nobody needs an assault rifle" refrain is important, in part because it is evaluated differently by people on each side of the issue. Because powerful weapons can actively project harm from one person to another, they are in a different category from other opt-in dangerous things like an outdoor uncovered pool and drinking alcohol.

Driving a car is frequently cited in these debates as one of those "you don't need it, but it is incredibly dangerous and causes huge numbers of deaths" activities, but I still think that gun ownership is a few steps higher on the risk-vs-utility scale, and therefore should be treated differently - there needs to be a dedicated debate that isn't sidelined by analogies to other risky activities. Those analogies complicate more than they clarify.
The Happy Land Fire killed 87 people, not a shot fired. Timothy McVeigh killed 189 people with fertilizer... and that was in 1995 -- under the "Assault Weapons Ban" of 1994.

I don't understand arguments like this at all. Is the argument that "there are other bad things so we shouldn't tackle this thing"?
Apple started in 2006 with no deal or coordination with Sun. Later when the FUD started, they were looking for protection from patent lawsuits (i.e. from NetApp), for support and expertise, and, possibly, reassurances around patent clauses within the CDDL with which I'm not an expert.
I'm perfectly OK with a 10 round magazine limit, I have trouble justifying more, even in a militia situation, no one has made a convincing argument that a greater magazine size would save lives - it just means that you'd be carrying less weight.

I am opposed to banning 'assault rifles' because an assault rift is a category with a list of things - I can make something just as deadly (and practical) without that list of things. Because of that, banning a gun with specific features (most of which are not known to enhance rate of fire or deadliness of aim) amounts to bad law.
WW3 a CHILLING VIEW OF UK, AS CAM MORON AGREES TO LET TURKEY INTO EU
What happens if you have a corrupted file (or more) that then gets replicated to your offsite? Are you keeping multiple versions offsite?
The debate isn't just about the AR-15, but since the AR-15 is "America's Gun", it just happens to get the spotlight.

The debate is about all military-grade civilian issue long semi-automatic rifles. The debate is about if the potential damage such a weapon can cause in the wrong hands is enough to justify an outright ban (or severe restriction on sales).

It was a well written piece and very informative, but I think it missed what the on-going debate is really about.
Thank you. I've been fooling around with VS Code and Mono, but I have been considering doing exactly as you described.
The "predominant number of actual culprits" are engineers.

"Engineering Terror" (2010) - http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/magazine/12FOB-IdeaLab-t.h...

"There’s a Good Reason Why So Many Terrorists Are Engineers" (2013) - http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/11/theres-a-good-reason-why...

As you are likely an engineer, do you want to be singled out every time you fly? Do you want all HN readers to be singled out, because most of us are likely engineers?

Why, or why not?

Then there's the sheer problem of defining "terrorism." Are attacks on abortion centers, including murders, due to 'Christian terrorism'? If so, when do we target Christians? Is the Charleston church shooting an example of 'white terrorism', and do we need to start profiling all white people?

If rich people are more likely to do white collar crime, do you start profiling them?

Or do you only profile the least powerful people, spend lots of money on huge numbers of false positives and further induce resentment, with essentially no chance of benefit?
> ...would it really be an infringement on the author's rights ... he would need to have 3 separate guns for sporting, hunting, and use of force?

How do you imagine that is even technically possible? A venn diagram of those gun classes would nearly fully overlap. Sure you could outlaw the bayo lug and the grenade launcher notch - and that would have prevented exactly 0 deaths.
any mirror?
> Having deadly weapons broadly available definitely increases homicide and mass shootings, the evidence is irrefutable.

Really? As I understand it, gun ownership has increased significantly over the last two decades, and homicide and mass shootings have gone down over that same time period.

It sounds like you think it's "obvious" that availability of firearms drives people dying from firearms, but the studies I've seen don't indicate a link.

Kind of like how availability of porn doesn't drive incidences of rape, even though intuitively, a person might expect that it should.
> Without supporting other operating systems it is hard to consider it as an alternative to anything.

They are just published source code to github. Yandex is a Russian search engine. This project is not commercial. You can clone source code from github for adding support of your operation system.
After the email fkup, it's not hard at all to believe that the DNC's servers are still insecure. I mean, the people that HRC hired to set up her server were introduced via the party machine.
VimDrawer – helps you to work with many open files in a sane way
People treating uplay like an STD almost makes me believe in market forces and rational consumers.
It looks like the 1,500 number includes all deaths of children under 18. However -- without going into that particular dataset -- these numbers are normally inflated by gang violence and include 17-year-olds killed in shootouts with police. I'm certainly interested in more data, but it's hard to find summary datasets that aren't slanted.
I can't take a pool to the local cinema and kill everyone inside. It's an irrelevant comparison.

To be exposed to the risk of drowning in your pool I actually need to go to said pool. This is not different from exposing myself to any other risk of my own free will.

My free will has no bearing on if someone wants to bring a gun to a public place and murder me and everyone else around.
Mass casualty producing weapons.
>30 ROUND FUCKING MAG.

I think that this is actually the most significant difference between guns. To rationalize having such a large magazine, you must believe either that A) you are going to be attacked by a large group of armed people, or B) are going to attack a large group of people.

It's the same rationale for not allowing fully-automatic weapons to be owned by ordinary citizens, and it's a good starting place for new legislation (and hopefully not the only legislation).
Maybe the deal was to make ZFS ready for personal computer / Apple requirements that may have interested Sun but not Oracle ? In the middle of an acquisition with a guaranteed few years of uncertainty, no strong backing from the new boss meant that Jobs simply bailed out.

Rumors in any case.
The First Steps to Employee Recognition
One of the problems with weapons in the AR 15 class is that they are very commonly converted to fully automatic. I cannot say if any recent mass shooting has featured such a gun, but a few of the Bundy militants in NV/OR were cited for possession of them, or bragged about possessing them on social media and forums.

Perhaps I just live in an unfortunate part of Texas, but I know a number of people who have performed the mod on theirs… and frankly, among the people I know, these were already there people I was last comfortable knowing owned any firearms at all...
The x.wordpress.com domain made me smile, is there a history of hackers using one-off free/hosted blogs for releases like this? It goes against every one of my marketing bones, but it is so dam cool.
Of course it is... It adds it to your UPlay account. What do you expect, for them to give it away on Steam?
>However, I don't think the impact would be nearly as severe for gun owners that might need to pass a few ID checks and own several weapons if needed for different uses.

Or how about mass genocide that has occurred in the past in several countries shortly after disarming the population in relatively recent history? The argument against that is always "Not in modern (post-Y2K) times/first world countries, just look at Australia and/or U.K!" and I don't find that argument very convincing.

I'm not scared of the U.S government going tyrannical/genocidal. But what about people who are refugees of countries where that happened? What would they think? I see no reason to disarm a population other than the ruling class fearing an armed population or a paranoid/ignorant population thinking "guns" are the problem. (Hint: People are the problem, not guns.)

Bad guys don't need laws to buy guns and murderers have no problem selecting other weapons when there is a lack of guns.

Homicide rates per capita are very similar before and after the gun buyback in Australia. "Murders with firearms" decreased though, so I guess they can pat themselves on the back for being just as murderous but with different weapons? Same trend with the U.K. Banning guns gave an "ease of mind" but didn't actually do anything. Similar to the TSA: security theater.

I do not find gun control arguments to be compelling and firmly believe in the right for every individual to protect themselves.

FWIW I do not own and likely will never own a gun.
> Is the argument that "there are other bad things so we shouldn't tackle this thing"?

I believe its actually "people can be killed without assault weapons, therefore restricting assault weapons has no benefit in protecting people from being killed". Which, ultimately, has the same basic kind of error in reasoning as "there are other bad things so we shouldn't tackle this thing", but its not precisely the same argument.
Do You Take Yourself Seriously?
> > 10 square degrees in area

> So basically we can only determine the general direction?

10 square degrees is about 0.3% of the full spherical sky.
It is briefly mentioned in the manpage, https://www.archlinux.org/pacman/PKGBUILD.5.html, but basically a pkgbuild can use a git repo as a source directly. Here's an example:

https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=pacma...

Compare it to pacman's release-based pkgbuild:

https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/P...

The major differences are the "git" url in the sources, the provides/conflicts metadata and the dynamic pkgver() function.
Hunting is more ethical, cheaper and also more convenient for those living in remote locations than purchasing meat at a supermarket.

Consider the cost of airlifting food to remote communities in Nunavut and you will understand the need.

http://nunavutfoodprice.tumblr.com/
> In my (rural, libertarian-leaning) home state, firearms owners often explicitly cite some variant of "capacity to resist totalitarianism" or "to defend the American people's liberty against the government" as reasons for having guns.

That's because the individuals who wrote the US constitution gave exactly that justification—though people (of course) argue whether or not it is still relevant.

From my perspective, the 1st amendment had a similar justification, so if you really don't buy that _guns_ can keep the gov't in check in any kind of realistic way, clinging to "free speech" as something we absolutely need—for the exact same reason—rings hollow; it doesn't seem like a principled position to me to reject one and embrace the other.
If you create a zpool with '-o autoexpand=on' you can replace disks with larger ones one at a time, waiting for each one to resilver. After replacing the last disk the pool will jump to the new size.
It's the substitution problem. The argument (seems to be), "If we ban semi-automatic rifles, that person who wants to kill all those people won't be able to harm anyone."

History has shown us this simply isn't the case. People who want to kill people will kill people with whatever means available. Happy Land, Oklahoma City, etc are just examples of this. I didn't see a huge push to ban pressure cookers after the Boston bombings.
This was definitely needed. There has been so much change in regards to type declaration and where to get them (DefinatelyTyped, tsd, typings). I also look forward to the documentation on creating type declaration files as it's all over the place right now. The whole namespace/internal module/external module confusion doesn't help either.
Seems to be Linux-only problem. Care to check for driver updates, and that GPU rendering is actually enabled?
LSI cards can be run in both RAID mode and passthrough / standard SAS/SATA controller mode for XFS/ZFS/btrfs -- which works wonderfully most of the time and cuts down on hw heterogeneity. You will have to use some disk controller or another, your motherboard is not going to have 12/24/36/48/80 SATA ports
I have some "cloud" servers at home DELL C6100 .. Xeon, lots of RAM. I used them as a lab at one point but am now confused what to do with 'em. These days, I am playing with deep learning. Is it reasonable to pick up some cheap GPU to go into these? Any other ideas?
Take a look at the stats of mass shootings or even just homicide committed with a deadly weapon in countries without gun control vs those without.

The difference isn't just striking. It's actually pretty awful to think about.

It's beyond conclusive that broad availability of firearms if not the cause is definitely highly correlated.
If another person cannot do your current job you cannot be promoted into another job. People who make themselves required at the current position are really hurting themselves long term.
I don't think you can treat it like a commodity exchange (futures contracts for N tons of soybeans, for example), even if you restict the platform only to dried flower bud product and ignore every other form of cannabis, due to the extreme variety of types of flower and plant. It would be like trying to have a chicago mercantile exchange commodity platform for wine.
So you're citing crap bloggers that don't have a clue about what they are talking about, and don't present any evidence for what they write?

Good!
Not making a comment either way on whether they should be doing this, but ... I think we all know what's going to come next :(

//add random number to stop Chrome from disabling autocomplete
//--number is stripped off in form processing routine
print "Address: <input type='text' name='address--" . rand() . "'>";
The problem with this argument is that in the timeframe the Orlando shooter was given (3 hours), a shotgun could have easily been a mass casualty producing weapon.
Since it's like one in a million people that are terrorists you're basically harassing entire groups of people on the premise that you'll luck out and find the one among them that's determined to cause harm.

This is so staggeringly unlikely to happen. The TSA is more likely to find a winning Powerball ticket in someone's luggage.
The cost of building large 5+ floor concrete structures that can take significant floor loading in kilograms per square meter? Building vertical anything isn't cheap, this is why you see massive cloud scale datacenters built into "shell" warehouse buildings that are tilt-up concrete walls, the whole thing 1 story high sitting on a concrete slab. Usually in some places where land is cheap in $/square meter. Example: Datacenters in The Dalles, OR.
Do you all work at companies that don't do design reviews and code reviews? Those seem like good ways to keep people in the loop and get feedback on idea/code. Code reviews should be interrupts, but nothing else should be.

I find the amount of work one can practically achieve in a day to be a good limiter of how much people will be kept out of the loop if they are not actively engaging in their email (or whatever system people use). The reality is, no matter how fast you think you're moving, it's not that fast.
Or that this person is lying or a confederate.
Well, this article actually makes me glad to not read Ars Technica for a while, and may actively prevent me from ever reading that thing again.

Here is how every single article on this topic of this particular author goes: there is a (quite minor, in fact) challenge, therefore we should abandon ever trying to regulate guns.

Let's start with this particular piece. Sure sure, it's quite hard to differentiate between assault weapons and "defensive weapons" and "recreational weapons." But that is MISSING THE POINT! The point is NOT that all weapons can kill. The point is: how the hell do we allow self-defense and recreational fun without endangering the society at large? However, instead of this, his argument is: hey, all weapons are dangerous, so let's just allow him (decent guy, no?) to own nuclear weapons. It's, you know, defensive.

Return to the stupid argument. Yes, there is a large difference between offensive and defensive weapons. For example, caliber. Offensive seeks to destroy, so the more power, the better; defensive seeks to disable while (let's face it) retreating, so not so much power required. Or, perhaps smaller magazine size; in hunting and defending, you don't need to spray, so replacing magazine is not that bad; while you are terrorizing, the break is awesome for your victims, obviously.

As you see, there are ways to differentiate, to make hunting/recreation safe. But no. Our dear, dear author wants none of that. Because the mechanism is so reliable, he wants like the exact same power as the guns used in battle. Because it's hard to differentiate, his solution is to let innocent people die. Because it's like a fraction more convenient, well, again, who cares about those strangers, right?

Similarly, I tried (very hard) to be open minded and read his articles on smart guns. Same kind of arguments. Oh, it's not 100% reliable, so no, it should be banned, because, omg, what if I am forced to use it.

You know, in decision making books that I worked through, there is a term for all of t these "reasons." They are called "excuses." You don't want something because, I don't know, the sizes of your hands, so you make up excuses. Oh, it's not 100% reliable. Oh, the government is taking over the world. Oh, politicians are treating me like idiots. Therefore, those bastards can die so I can get that thing.
That is a beyond tiny subset of society that actually applies to. For 99.9% of more of people that go hunting it's a luxury.
I love this line:

"You can go back to broadcasting your own moral superiority on social media, and I can go back to tuning you out until your rage therapy session is over."

Preaching on social media is so 2007, so tired and so done.
I think it does. Your argument is that the AR-15 is the modern equivalent to the Henry rifle, which is true. But modern combat rifles are designed for different goals (killing quickly at close range), which isn't the use case for hunting.

You argue that police use makes it legitimate, but this is exactly wrong: police use it for the same reason the military do: killing quickly at close range.

Yes, the modularity of the AR-15 means you can adapt to to do other things. That isn't a strength from the point of view of stopping mass killings though.
Very interesting thread about this here: https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/74317975006403788...

Looks like it may still be Russia
Layered security. You always add redundant security so in case another layer fails you have a fallback. It's the better be safe than sorry version of infosec.
I've kept people on because they were going through a rough patch and I felt squeemish about kicking them when everything else was going wrong. Bad stuff happens to good people and I didn't want to make it worse.

But it hurt group morale on every team they were shuffled to. Hard working teams quietly build up resentment against dead weight.

In retrospect, I would have been better off getting the board's permission to institute 6~12 month severances for company initiated terminations instead of the 3 month one that we had. Or done an extended paid leave - or something.

I think the reason I didn't (I don't even remember at this point) was one of my early employees - a star performer by every measure - said something like: "Hey! Why would you be paying them 12 months salary for being a loser?" (Not that he was incompassionate - he wasn't - but making the point the way that anyone from the Bronx might make that point.)

I don't think I ever figured out what to do with that other than deciding that being the boss sucked and I never wanted to do it again.
What makes you think of the AR-15 as a high-powered weapon? It's actually pretty low-powered as far as rifles go - virtually all bolt-action "hunting rifles" are much more powerful. The whole design purpose for this class of weapons is to be lower-powered and lower recoil to make rapid fire and fast follow-up shots more practical.
> I didn't see a huge push to ban pressure cookers after the Boston bombings.

That's not true, "assault pressure cookers" were banned—especially the scary looking ones. Problem solved!
That playbook is weak. Real research would be a lot more explosive than that.

How could one prove it? Describe the hack in detail in a message and sign it with a key?
It's an interesting way to think but I disagree that it's very useful because the whole problem is correctly calculating the expected value in the first place for real-life events. In a situation where that calculation is trivial, as with the wheel, you should certainly use it.