skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
CA has too much housing already. Consider water availability and traffic jams. In LA and sometimes in San Jose, consider smog.

Why does everybody have to live there anyway? The country would be way better off if 25 million people left there for Tennessee, West Virginia, Mississippi, Kentucky, Michigan, Maine, Indiana, Arkansas, and Louisiana.
The whole point of putting drivers in the kernel tree is that they get properly maintained as part of kernel development. All the kernel hackers are responsible for keeping all the in-kernel drivers working. If it's at all acceptable for a kernel change to break a driver with no fix, that driver doesn't belong in the kernel tree.
To use your metaphor, yes if the military installed a single model of identical, network-connected engine in every vehicle they own, they would absolutely be fools. A single hack could, in a strategically critical moment, disable all motorized assets - every vehicle and generator in the US military shutting down at the same time. That's a disaster.

And you don't have to put in the backdoor just for the election. You can put one in and use it opportunistically. Someone backdoored a huge amount of Juniper VPN hardware, in hopes that it might be useful some day:

http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/01/juniper-drops-nsa-de...

And to answer your question, this is how you get silicon like a CPU to do what you want:

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/05/backdoor_foun...

These are just two examples that made the news. It's a practical certainty that there's backdoors in all sorts of COTS components that we don't know about yet. At this point there's nothing above suspicion.

For the scheme in TFA to work, they need a unhackable computer. If there is a single exploit or backdoor that happens to be in it, whoever controls it can pick the US congress, the senate, and the POTUS. Not metaphorically, literally. How is taking that degree of risk, when you know that backdoors and exploits are commonplace, not incredibly foolish?
The problem is that one person that tells you they're just joking and actually goes out and commits suicide. Then it's on you, the healthcare professional. Lawyers would ruin you in court.

I've been in and out of various psychiatric facilities, including that very same facility in Arlington, and it seems like a lot of the policies & procedures are to cover themselves legally.

Oh, I've been there as a Paramedic, not as a patient. Almost forgot that bit. We typically bring people in the front door. Even voluntary admissions.
The one thing that struck me as odd is that Millwood always has someone (a LCSW or something) come out and talk to patients there in the lobby some before having them sign any of the admission paperwork. They don't lock you in a room and then have you sign.
That doesn't seem so unusual to me. I've been using Android for about 6 years now, and I'd estimate I spend $2-5 a month on apps - the occasional $10 utility, some $1 games, etc.

6 years * 12 months/year * $3/month = 216 USD = 289 AUD.
Angular 3 will be skipped. Angular 4 is next and due in March 2017 [video]
Not the sugar and caffeine? You can switch to seltzer then.
>> Major features were added over the course of weeks!
>> — to say nothing of getting the overall architecture right from the start.

[Most likely] it is not that they got it right, right from the start. These 'awesome' programmers would have spent weeks before getting it right. These classify as throw away experiments and they keep at it till it satisfies their own internal target of what the solution should be like till it is right.

The best parameter of that right could be say the simplicity of the overall internal implementation and the exposed external API.

Now I am not saying that there are not geniuses around, but even if they are getting it right, it will still be backed by countless hours of hard work and practice.

Most likely asking these awesome programmers how they are getting it right, will throw some more light.
> How is asking google to remove me from their indices forcing other people to forget?

"Asking" is very different from "legally compelling".

If we buy the use of the "forgetting" terminology, it is quite clear how forcing google to expunge someone from all records is "forcing other people to forget". This isn't a complicated analogy, so I'm not sure what you're confused about.

> Where exactly is the "force"?

EU Law. Is that not manifestly obvious?
A meal prep service for bodybuilders. The hardest part of bodybuilding is eating right. Something that is affordable, nutritious, and calorie dense would be extremely valuable. There is no meal delivery service I know of that satisfies the last criterion. $10 should get you at least 1000 healthy calories
Google already has the capability to remove results, so they do not need to be "enabled" by EU law. I'm not really sure how you imagine this works, but the "right to be forgotten" refers to various legal frameworks in the EU for forcing companies to delete data that pertains to an individual.
Is France the only country that gets this power? What happens when China demands the removal of Tiananmen Square wikipedia article in the name of unity? Or when the UK requests the removal of the Vietnamese napalm girl in the name of decency? Do we just keep taking down results until we're left only with things that no country objects to?
> A situation where every idea you come up with, everything you think, every last shred of creativity is owned by someone else is one of the most profoundly dystopian things I can imagine.

That's rather overdramatic. Several centuries ago, every idea you come up with, everything you think, you could probably keep as your own because no one was interested and there was no way you could sell them and make living, even if you really wanted to, which you probably did not, because such a lifestyle was out of most people's reach.

"What are you saying you've been up to all this morning, thinking? Cut out the laziness and go feed the cows, or there will be no lunch for you!"
Hilarious. I think there's a market for your product.
I have a simpler explanation for this feeling- it's just that time of year again. Judging by the other responses it's just on everyone's minds. We can all look back and take stock of what we accomplished throughout the year and feel like we could have done more, could have done it better. When I'm bored I like to window shop cheap used cars on CraigsList. I think to myself "No one sees what I see in this beauty- if it was mine I'd be so happy". Code can be the same way and it seems like if it was yours it would be a new lease on life. The code may be found in the darkest corners of the internet so neglected but so much potential. Recognize in that moment you are creating your "style" your "way" of creating the inspiration which is really the goal. It's not about personal worth it's really about feeling free to create. Developers are their most creative selves when they are happy so...my first suspect in finding the path to developer enlightenment is environmental factors. Development IDE? Workspace area? Skipping breakfast? Look at these things with objective eyes then try to improve them then try again. Merging all of this with financial concerns is going to wire your brain's reward system up for self defeat- gain the freedom first then the money.
>This is just so that malware reverse engineers can't run strings on the executable (note also where they say this executable is stripped but not packed) and then block/tip the handful of hard-coded domains

Nothing to do with `strings`. The purpose of domain generation algorithms is simply to prevent bot loss from domain suspension/C&C takedowns.

Unless these guys patched mirai to authenticate the server somehow, this is a really easy way for them to lose all of their bots.

As I stated earlier, this enables any competing botmaster to easily steal their bots simply by taking down the nameservers for their main domains. Mirai has built in functionality to do that, the ".dns" command.

Even without that flaw, it's also a really bad way of keeping the bots alive since 365 domains will be trivial for the registry to blacklist.
They don't need to restrict access by Google search domain. They can do it by search IP geolocation. Thus, if you're in France, you won't see the result from any Google site, but if you're in Germany, you will see it on all Google search sites.

I agree with them that worldwide banning is troubling, especially if there is open door for any country to ban anything from any other country.

Let's not forget that deleting something from Google doesn't delete it from human memory, the source website or mirrors it might have, and from other search engines. What gets on the internet tends to be resilient to deletion. Google can only do so much and they didn't write the content in the first place. They are just infrastructure.
The whole point of plugins is that they dont need to be maintained as part of the core product. Seeing AMD's response, it's obvious that they dont expect Linux kernel devs to maintain this thing.
They should offer a proper and easy plugin interface for the kernel where devs can make drivers for it without having to merge code into the kernel itself.
This really seems too obvious, at some point the kernel will have too much code, will have to support too many different pieces of new hardware to be understood or maintained by anybody. I'm sure Windows doesnt merge 3rd party graphics driver code into their subversion repo, that would be insane. But just because Linux is open source, it has to do that.. no of course not.
Sounds like a recipe for even more sprawl. The bay area may need more housing but build up, not out.
As someone living with a student plagued by a school-issued Chromebook, I beg to differ. Especially for a student that could run AutoCAD and similar useful software even on a very cheap Windows PC.

The point is, it's really not a "gift". They gave themselves a tax break, by "donating" some hardware that ensures them future business via services. It takes some hardcore groupthink to be convinced that it's otherwise.
If only.

Tennessee is quite nice as is Maine.
Google currently has more money than God, which alleviates much cultural pressure to extract marginal revenue from, eg, employees' toy mobile apps.
That's an assumption. Following that assumption, you would need to ask your employer if he agrees with any tiny contribution you do to any open source project out there. Which doesn't scale. What the employment contract does is own the contribution precisely because it doesn't make any sense to ask permission everytime an employee writes anything in his own time.
That's been the stipulation of every fan club ticket I've bought for the last decade. They're in my name, I must show up, I must show ID, and I must be entering the venue to use them.

Seems solid.
Agreed. I'll take that one step further. Take responsibility for all that you output AND all of your input.

I.e If someone does something that makes you unhappy, on some level you have agreed to allow that to make you unhappy. You can also decide to not be affected by that input.

Not saying it's easy, just saying that that it's possible to have some control of response to input.
Marc Andreessen on Change, Constraints, and Curiosity
That sounds similar to the scary emails I receive every time a domain nears its expiration date:

"YOUR DOMAIN IS EXPIRING ..."

And they're always from SEO companies trying to sell marketing.
The newspaper who wrote an article about the Frenchman has a right to display that article to people outside of France and has a right to have search engines index the article to drive traffic to its website.

The Internet user outside of France has a right to read something critical of the Frenchman to decide whether to do business with him on that basis and has a right to find that information using a search engine.
They look amazing. Everything else looks shabby when you switch.
"SPN, too, has a streaming app of its own - but it is limited in what cord-cutters can view there. The app reserves its best programming for traditional TV subscribers to prevent too many cable customers from migrating away"

This says a lot to me. They are holding on to the cable dinosaur ways and then crying when people move on to other services.

"Eventually, ESPN may conclude that its subscriber losses are so great that the only way to retain those customers is to begin offering cable content more widely on the app, said Jan Dawson, an analyst at the market research firm Jackdaw Research."

Ding ding ding.
Arctic Explorers Face an Unusual Challenge: A Lack of Ice at the North Pole
Let us not lose sight of this: the enforcement of the "right to be forgotten" is a form of censorship. This is not about enforcement of copyright, or defamation, it's about an individual's ability to censor true information simply because that information happens to be about them. And it can only be effective if enforced globally. If the EU succeeds in enforcing the RTBF globally it would set a catastrophic precedent for freedom of speech.
So you are paid to work a fixed number of hours, but in exchange they own you for the other hours you're not even there. And I thought only backwards people from the South enjoyed that line of "business".
I think the strongly connoted language is warranted.

If it becomes effectively legal to surveil and store everything about anyone because you own servers, what kind of world does that lead to?

These are important questions that should be in the forefront before we're too far gone, which we're certainly flirting with.
> Aside from anything else, it’s plain common sense that one country should not have the right to impose its rules on the citizens of another, especially not when it comes to lawful content.

That's just not true. A country has the right to impose it's rules on you if you want to do business in that jurisdiction. Of course no one is forcing them to do business there, which they did not mention in the post.
It's obvious what you mean, but it's not obvious how or why an EU law means Google has to change data in their datacenters in the USA for someone searching from Brazil.

What if Australia ruled that Google must keep all data on all people worldwide and forbid deletions. Should that override all other country laws? If not, why should the EU law affect other countries?

> This is people being in charge of their behavioral and historical data that google has locked up in their data silos.

It's not "their" data. People clicked "I agree", and it's someone else's data now. People aren't in charge of it, they never have been.
I don't think it is all that common in engineering programs here in the US, though not being an engineer myself, I am really speaking out of ignorance here. I don't know if there is something equivalent in the sciences -- there are ScDs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Science) but as far as I can tell, it is equivalent to a PhD in all but name.

Also, based on the description on Wikipedia, it seems like a D.Eng. is basically like a PhD except that the research problem can be more "applied" (not sure what this means -- it can mean very different things in different fields). In particular, a student still has to pass courses and exams, and in the end work on a piece of individual research as their dissertation.
Other people's machines, you mean.
I get what you're saying, and with most other CEOs I would agree, but it doesn't really compute in his case. Considering the amount of time he has spent for the past decade+ evangelizing the developer side of things, and how obviously he empathizes with life as a developer... I'm happy to accept whatever he says at face value. He's a good egg.

Also, thank you for giving me the opportunity to post something positive about someone in tech! I'm generally the one being cynical and negative, so it's a nice change :)
How I launch a product in few weeks
I have nothing against Joel. But to be fair, as people in finance use to say, "history is not indicative of the future".
I think your version of the intent is correct but the post by the author makes it sound like google here is a champion of something virtuous when in reality they're just protecting their own business interests. If google was a publicly funded operation and their indexing/search algorithms were in the public domain then they might be able to make a convincing case but as it is there is clearly misdirection going on here.

From where I stand they are trying to take advantage of the murky definitions around data retention and various policies applicable to personally identifiable information to side-step certain restrictions in various countries that have much stronger policies around use cases of such data.
The problem is big enterprises need support agreements and the other typical enterprisation features. An open source project alone will never fit most enterprise's appetites, especially for something as important as security/auditing/compliance. You at least need a company behind the open source project willing to provide enterprise setup and support.
They have raised cash by taking on investment from the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (the sovereign wealth fund) and also selling off some major assets, most notably their fabs (GlobalFoundries) and even their HQ building. It is also worth noting that large accounting losses do not always correspond to large negative cash flows. Stuff like depreciation (though less of an issue now without the fabs) and writing off "goodwill" from e.g. their ATI acquisition cause large paper losses without actually adversely affecting their cash position.
Yahoo Answers: Latest Questions
I built my project for myself, and started using it about a week after I'd first run `git init`. Once I did that I spent several weeks making it prettier, writing documentation, and before that was complete I had my first user.

I think it took me about a month to get my second user, and another month before I broke ten. Nowadays I seem to get 3-5 users every week for a free trial, a third of which go on to pay. So the growth is somewhat random and irregular.
Practice your freedom of speech outside my personal life.
Their noise canceling headset and earbud products are better than anything on the market, so that's not quite right.

I use the QC20 earbuds, which are even better at noise canceling than the QC15 headphones. As a developer, they are my number one tool to get into the zone.

They're also very calming on airplanes and elsewhere with a lot of low- or high-frequency noise.

I have tried a number of noise canceling headsets, but Bose is the best, something reviews also confirm.

(Audio quality is also in the top range, according to me. Not quite as good as my Sennheiser HD25, but close enough.)
The main problem with FindFace: literally anyone can use it, not just government but everyone, including criminals.
As someone without cable what liberal agenda is ESPN pushing? I haven't watched in years. What politics do they cover?
I was watching a Dot Net Rocks video[1] from 2012 with Don Syme being interviewed about the release of F# 3.0 and they ask him what's planned for F# 4.

He says that what devs are telling them is that the language is good, but they want better tools, so he wouldn't be opposed to a solid maintenance release just around improving tooling (but nothing is planned yet).

So the day after watching that, four years after the video, it's a bit weird to find you saying "F# 4 and now F# 4.1 - the language is way ahead of the tooling".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvYyI4kG1Vo
I believe Peretti has made repeated claims dating back to the founding of the company that this was the plan. Either he's committed or doesn't want to be legitimately called a liar :-)

All joking aside: so far they've done good work and I assume it is earnest.
Do you have the right to ask my browser client that it is not allowed to hit https://the_forum_you-post_to.com/your_post?

Google is an automated browser client (more or less). Do you think real people are justified to read your post, but automated people aren't?
Graphics cards are used for professional work too, not only gaming.
Great point about the other side of the coin about retention policies. The bottom line is that neither retention nor deletion is currently possible. Isn't that really the issue? If Australia wanted to retain whatever data google had then surely some kind of export functionality would be the answer for that use case. If google's retention policies were by some miracle something like 1 year instead of forever that is.
That's what I've always done. I've found that most employers have few issues with saying "these projects predate employment and we don't own or want them."

In one case, I had a clause that said "anything that increases my recognition in [area of tech] is now owned by the company." It was almost too broad but I managed to stay well within the bounds and never have a "questionable" project.
No. You'll notice that your browser doesn't sequentially wait for each character to show up on the screen before rendering the next character.

The obvious thing to have done would be to have a single progress bar for all decompression operations requested in a single UI action. Darwin has had a process scheduler for some time now; they can be expected to make good use of it.

It is infuriating to be waiting for animations to end for literally 12 seconds.
Congrats,

This is really neat, however don't own an Ipad but have wanted the ability to share realtime drawings with different devices.

Hows the traction going?
I guess I'm not in the habit of accepting anything anyone says at face value. It doesn't mean he's running some long-running conspiracy, it's simply a reminder that his perspective comes from a particular position.
Part of tinnitus can be caused by physical issues - neck strain can exascerbate it
This is what disk encryption targets.
> is a great problem to have ;)

Your comment is inspiring. The question then becomes, how much of your project's worth, as a percentage, are they going to come after you for?
I worked in a tech department of a rather large law services organization. There was a desire to maintain certain inefficiencies so that more hours could be billed to clients. If it could be done in 25% of the time, that's 75% less they could bill clients for 'attorney time spent.'

See how well pitching 'do it faster and make less' goes over.
I think you may misunderstand what the right to be forgotten usually refers to. It's not about a user's "data" such as emails or online comments; it's usually about news articles that mention a person.

Surely you would agree that no matter what French law is, there is no way a French judge should be able to force, say, an American company to not display links to American websites (which happen to mention a French person) for American users?

(disclosure: I work for Google, but not on anything related to RTBF, and my views are my own)
Are you saying it's too noisy to do that?
> The evident conclusion is that there are none. You are selling all of your intellectual output.

The conclusion is that we either reject this kind of slavery, or at least start charging the extra hours.
> I'm not in the habit of accepting anything anyone says at face value.

Well, that is generally a wise approach. The only reason I'm defending him is that I mentally pegged him a long time ago as an unusually decent guy. To be fair, I only know him from his writings and public speaking, but that has been consistently developer-minded.