skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think the best example is Steam. A common sentiment online is "I don't pirate games any more because Steam makes it so easy to buy them, plus there are often incredible sales." I share this sentiment.

A large part of Steam's success is that they built a better product than the one offered by piracy. That's worth paying for.

Granted, this isn't a cure-all. I'm sure some people still pirate games, and it's probably impossible to estimate how many represent "lost sales." Moreover, games are one of the trickier things to pirate, often requiring some technical knowledge (using disk images, keygens, cracks, etc.). Music is obviously much easier to pirate.
It doesn't but every minimalist has their own personal exceptions. As with most things in life achieving 100% is more idealism than realism.

http://mnmlist.com/iphone/

https://zenhabits.net/whyphone/

Plus working in tech, not having the latest (or one gen prior) iPhone, often means not being able to run new apps.
Somehow I feel like this all comes back to banking and the finance industry. The issues in these cases all come down to money. They overbook flights to maximize resource (plane) allocation. This one was a case of having to swap in a smaller plane. It all comes down to how expensive airplanes are and the fierce competition among carriers that leads to a system with little redundancy. But think about that - how can there be such intense competition in an industry dealing with such high-priced equipment? Granted, a solution to this pinch is probably going to mean higher average fares. But I'm starting to look toward a much bigger picture to see how this comes about. Any thoughts on this?
It just feels like you're holding the content creator hostage with your threats to steal their work if they don't do what you tell them to (price their content "reasonably").

If I want to charge $600 for my book, I should be allowed to do that, just like you're allowed to not buy my book. I don't see an effective moral framework that would allow someone to only obey personal property rights if they thought the rights were "reasonable".

Edit: I've said some unpopular things on HN today, so I'm now being rate limited in my responses. Here's my response to one comment:

> Copying your book does not prevent you from attempting to ask for compensation or from attempting to sell it

Yes, it absolutely does. You're working in the world of "is" not "ought". This is firmly an "ought" conversation. You "ought" not copy my book, because as part of me giving it to you in exchange for money, I asked you not to do that, and you agreed.

> but you are competing in a market where your product only carries as much value as your customers perceive it to hold, and not what you declare it to be.

This is only true if people are willing to take my product without compensating me at all, which is exactly what I said originally is "holding the content creator hostage".

If you don't pay my (possibly absurd) price, you don't get my work, period. There is no working moral framework in which you get to decide if you deserve to steal my work or not.
Jordan Peterson says that The University has moved online.

The shells that remain on campuses are expensive finishing schools and a way around the IQ testing ban.
What happened with The Pirate Bay was a travesty. The issue doesn't even go to the root of copyright law, it just shows that the USG is more than willing to throw its weight around for the benefit of the rich and powerful in Hollywood.

TPB was perfectly legal within the jurisdiction in which they operated. Rather than change the law, Sweden mounted a farcical prosecution after the US threatened sanctions if they didn't address the matter.

TPB hosted no media on its own; it was a torrent site, and linked to torrent files that contained the hashes of files and a link out to a tracker that matched people who possessed those hashes with others. If you want to make that illegal, that has far-reaching complications for all kind of online services. That's why instead of making it illegal, they just said "This is pissing off some rich people, so you're going to jail."

Most people support copyright in principle. It's the draconian extent to which modern copyright law has been stretched, again solely for the benefit of copyright holders and at the expense of the public that upsets people.
I do not believe in freedom of the will. Schopenhauer's words: "Man can do what he wants, but he cannot will what he wills" accompany me in all situations throughout my life.

-- Albert Einstein
This is the example I use to show people the dangers of these kinds of devices.

Every now and then someones device activates while I'm giving the example and all the talk of, "But its so convenient!" dies pretty fast.
2017 MotoGP Hospitality GP OF THE AMERICAS
Grand Prix of the Americas is coming on 21-23 April 2017
BOOK VIP Village Hospitality Packages at the Circuit of the Americas with RTR Sports Marketing leading MotoGP Hospitality Agency London based
Not sure if the political angle scares me more than the commercial one. On that note, the consumer-side blood-sucking seems less likely than a shakedown of popular platforms such as facebook or google.

And with a 100-year headstart in political shmoozing, good luck to any new entrants for the last mile.
Microservices are software components that work
How much of success is luck? I honestly don't know. It feels like another feel-good mantra coming out of SV culture. Most successful people I know or have heard of do not fit the profile of an average Joe (including qualities that are pre-set at birth and cannot change with success).
Hulu’s Live TV service to cost $39.99/month with ads, sources say
Some stranger on the internet can have you killed by the people entrusted to protect you.. and the solution here is to not joke about it? Screw that. This is hilarious.

Why do I get the feeling that SWAT protocols would change overnight if a high profile CEO was the victim.
Copyright is not the same as trademarks. Disney can keep people from using mickey mouse without life + infinity which seems to be the current system. Movie adaptions for example could be prevented even if the book is in the public domain.

7 years seems short, but revenue capture must balance with the cost to society of copyright. Thus, ~80% of the revenue for 200x the freedom is a viable trade off.

PS: Remember the constitution explicitly says it's to promote the creation of new content NOT extract money from existing content. Having an author extract residuals for 50 years discourages new works.
Agreed, and it's right there in the docs that one should/could just copy+paste these aliases into their project, read the CSS, and understand how it's working. It's important to know how flexbox works, so you can write your own media queries that will help you align and distribute your objects as screen size changes.
There's this, that I just found today:

http://www.fmxlinux.com/

It certainly looks interesting.
"A common example is process as proxy. Good process serves you so you can serve customers. But if you’re not watchful, the process can become the thing. This can happen very easily in large organizations. The process becomes the proxy for the result you want. You stop looking at outcomes and just make sure you’re doing the process right. Gulp."

Seems like this is exactly the kind of issue companies like United Airlines suffer from.
Now Image Search can jump-start your search for style
Luminar reveals sensors that could make self-driving cars safer than human
What rights do you believe content creators should have? Most discussions I've seen suggest content creators ought to have fewer rights, not more rights.

The absurd lengths of time for copyright come to mind. This idea that the family of an author, for example, ought to be entitled to royalties from book sales for many years after the author's death... That's a right enjoyed by no other profession or trade or job. It puts authors in a category with land owners and capitalists.

Personally, I think we should be seeking to reduce the amount of rent-seeking in our society, not increase it. That we glorify so many creators as celebrities and obsess over every minor detail of their lives makes my position an unpopular one, however.
Wow, what great links! Thanks. Also I had no idea No Starch had a Rust book.
> In general, diversity of skin color, ethnicity, gender, etc is a good proxy for diversity of thought

is it really though? it seems like you are assuming it is but I'm not convinced that it actually is.
I'm in the process of creating an enterprise startup. We haven't locked down a sale just yet due to not having a completed product yet. We have learned that organizations tend to be a bit risk adverse, so no demo means no sale. However we are in discussions with a couple organizations. What I can say is that these discussions have only been possible because of industry connections. I do feel that if it weren't for having worked for these companies in the past or working with the individuals coordinating with their respective companies that we probably wouldn't even have gotten a call back.
This is a related issue and possible counter example - how do you define datastructures passed around microservices? Serialized objects ala protobufs? Versioned XML or JSON? Schema versioned docs?

This is a great opportunity to have shared libraries or at least schemas across different microservices. In fact having each service write their own parsers or serializers would be a mistake for me.
So, I suppose water is the only liquid on Earth that looks like water with a visual inspection through a sealed container.
> pursuing a globalization agenda

What does this actually mean?

Is there anyone in politics who doesn't have an "agenda" in some sense - what would that even look like, a promise to be purely reactive without having any long term policy?
Clients[1] are absolutely vulnerable too. But again, I'm not aware of any code that actually uses MSG_PEEK.

[1] Really, there isn't any distinction at the kernel level between a UDP "client" and "server". It's the same set of syscalls being used on both sides, the difference is just who speaks first.
I feel exactly the opposite. Working an entire week at the office will have me so demoralized and burnt out by Friday that I have to go get away from everyone in the woods for the weekend.

The most effective mix for me is going into the office on Monday, and getting all of the meetings and planning and face-to-face busywork out of the way, and then working from home the rest of the week. It's easily 2-3X as productive, and I'm just so much happier.
I'm basically against overbooking, but playing devil's advocate: is it that hugely different from fractional reserve banking? They claim you can get your money out at any time, but that's not the case if everyone tries at once.
Spotify wouldn't have existed if the music companies' hand hadn't been forced by piracy.
I'm with you in regards to how my mind responds to working from home (not well).

Humans evolved as social animals. Everything we've always done has been in groups. When you are growing up, you spend most of your waking time in the company of other people (school). The ones who don't, who are homeschooled alone, turn out "weird". Until the modern advent of telecommunications, working has meant being physically collocated with other people. Spending most of your waking hours alone at home is an unusual thing to do; we're not adapted for it, and it's tough.

100% telecommuting doesn't work for a lot of people, maybe even the majority of people. It definitely doesn't work for me. Coworking spaces are one solution, but I only have a short commute anyway, so I'm just going to go into the real office.
> sharing domain specific logic

Isn't that just called a business requirement?

> you have to change and deploy every last one of your services.

How is that different to code duplication as the article recommends? When business requirements change all affected code points needs to change.. you can't just wish that away.

-

The real problem here is mismanaging seperation of concerns.

Cqs mostly solves the hard problems. But having shared read objects will, at times, require multiple systems to make use of the same domain logic. Whether you're better off with code duplication or a hard shared dep is a trade off up to you to figure out. I tend to go with a mix that makes sense based on expected frequency of change and how breaking the changes are likely to be.

Another microservices is also one answer but can be an unworkable bottleneck for a lot of these types of situations.
Shameless plug, my version of YABHA (yet another bash history app):
https://github.com/andmarios/bashistdb

Written in go, uses sqlite and can work locally or remotely. In the latter case you can send history from many accounts and search globally. Transport encryption is based on NaCl. One binary serves all roles.

Doesn't store other information than command line and time but this is what I need most of time.

The main pain point behind its creation was searching in history. There is a global flag (search in all accounts, -g), the wild card is SQL's wild card (%). Less frequently used but very helpful, content search (-A, -B, -C, like grep). Also regexp is supported though very rarely is needed.
Never been to Shenzhen but as a Malaysian, it looks a lot like a roti canai, which is an Indian-influenced flatbread. There are frozen ones sold internationally (I've personally seen them in grocery stores in the UK and South Korea) so they may be available where you are. It might be called either roti canai or roti paratha on the packaging.
Thanks, I eventually came across it.
Note that lazy-static does not "statically allocate a buffer" for all definitions of "statically allocate": lazy-static computes it's value on first use, and must use dynamic alloc space (ie: malloc/box)

Also, lazy-static has been around for a long time. Releases first occurred in 2014! I'd be surprised if it had not been considered.
The flagship feature of TS is static typing. That will never exist in JS.
SPA as in Single Page Application?

We are using it for reports and we are tailoring our HTML specifically to the reports so we haven't had that issue. If I needed Javascript it may not be the best solution.

I like that it generates full PDFs (with real text objects) though not just a static image. I'm not sure if you can generate a PDF like that with PhantomJS. I haven't tried.
Thank you so much for the feedback!

I will add some text to show in case of empty list. I agree the button (FAB) is difficult to find on large screens but it is part of the Material design guidelines (https://material.io/guidelines/components/buttons-floating-a...). I will think of some other approach.
The other issue is to stop overbooking every single flight and allow some slack to handle these unexpected situations that inevitably come up.
Not only that, the security lines are now a security issue.
Uber Reportedly Had a Secret ‘Hell’ Program to Track Lyft Drivers
Yes the desktop is just as bad as the phone. This is why I don't alow any of those devices have secrets that could be used without me being physically present to access data of users I am responsible for, or my own.

You are coming at this from a threat profile of joe individual user. Okay, point taken.

I am talking about the perspective of trying to take every reasonable step to reamin secure while being targeted by skilled adversaries who have a lot to gain if they succeed. It is not that much extra work to reduce attack surface so much further than TOTP-generator-on-a-phone offers, so why not teach anyone best practices that will listen?

Say I have 30+ TOTP secrets in my mobile phone app, and also my password manager. Everyting from Gmail to my AWS root account.

If the TOTP secrets are on my phone and an attacker compromises my phone... they get -everything-. If I am using a hardware token for TOTP and I quickly expire the sessions of all really important things I don't log into often, like AWS... then an attacker only gets a slice of the farm instead of the whole thing.

What this buys is us is damage control and a much clearer picture of what an attacker could of accessed, and what they probably could not of because no cookies or secrets were available to memory or disk at that time. I can assert -maybe- this one token was phished, but that none of the others were at risk.

If the attacker is on a phone with Google Authenticator, they an just generate all the codes they want for every service. We lose the whole farm.
I didn't buy these appliances (rental), my last apartment had basic analog appliances. They're so much better. I really do not need digital inputs on my appliances. I definitely do not need WiFi or smartphone control!
For me the only issue was kerning with some specific fonts on windows servers. Do you have any other examples?
It is work but workers are not in a position to bargain for their value added. Bezos keeps it.

We should tax land not income and stop forcing people to under-sell their labour.

Spare me the "Russia" extreme example. This isn't quantitative, we can dislike that extreme and also the extreme celebrated by the USA which fails so many.
No, rewriting alone doesn't make software great. But you have to realize that all modern browser engines started out before 2000. They were not built with multi-core processors in mind, nor with GPUs, as the web was still mostly text. And it does require rewriting a lot of things to change that architecture out. Google won't be able to compete with that in the long run just by continuously updating their browser engine.
Houston, Dallas and New York City: America's Great 3-Way Housing Supply Race
They are not necessarily rationalizations — that may be your own internal perspective biasing what you hear. You can also probably imagine a point where having too many board games would be feel burdensome — 10? 100? 1000?

And then consider that that number varies highly by person. Personally I own zero board games, but there is a board game parlor in walking distance from my apartment, and friends have great ones like CAH.

Nothing self-congratulatory about it for me — it's just simpler to own and maintain less things. Then when you do own less things, you are more particular about the specific things you do choose to let into your life, opt-in vs opt-out.
>"Yeah, unfortunately there are people behind the scenes pumping out a whole lot of BS and aggressively manipulating the dev ecosystem with VC dollars"

Can you elaborate on this? This intrigued me but I didn't follow your arguments after. Can you give a concrete or specific example?
User surly UX. Was going to book an impromptu multi-legged trip between San Francisco, Iowa and Arizona.

American Airlines quoted a price, but the only available seats cost (around) $33 - $58 extra for each flight -- total was $200 extra. Bait and switch? So, I switched to Delta.

But Delta's antique web design wouldn't allow a change. So, I attempted to talk to a Human. Voice menu was a bit schizoid: transitioning from voice to a touch-only menu. Love the response: "your selection was invalid" Who designs these things? A Lost in Space fan? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWwOJlOI1nU

Then I get to the part where it says: "You may choose to have us call you back ... or stay on hold ... wait time is over 3 hours". So, I cancelled.
> all the people who try to moralize piracy be saying "<insert strawman>" or today's rationalization du jour

To explain your logical fallacy: The rationalisations haven't ever changed, they are not "du jour", and they have never included your one quoted example. The fact you've quoted an invented example that is easily falsifiable doesn't automatically discount other, valid rationalisations.

> the pain that I - like every content creator - has to bear for them

And this is the crux of the primary valid rationalisation. I don't believe the pain is causally attributable to piracy. I could be wrong, this is my subjective stance, but it is not only far from easily discountable, it's been continuously confirmed by research. There's even been repeated correlations shown with improvements of content-creators' lot as a result of piracy.[0][1]

It is of course understandable for content-creators to be frustrated by piracy. Content-creators do genuinely struggle to make a reasonable living from their work, and the media tells us it's piracy's fault. Who are we to argue?

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/music/2009/apr/21/study-finds-pi...

[1] https://gigaom.com/2009/11/02/419-research-p2p-filesharing-n...
> I don't believe most people think content creator's shouldn't get paid.

Of course not. For most, it's a clear case of cognitive dissonance. People say things like torrenting should be legal because information wants to be free and copying is different than stealing and you know all the rest. Then you ask them if content creators should get paid and they say of course. Then you ask them how, and you get blank stares.

They haven't thought that far. Maybe they say "it's not my job to figure it out, the content creators should do that." Interesting. Have you considered the fact that maybe it's not as simple as it seems? That maybe a single indie content creator like you or me will very poissbly NOT be able to solve this incredibly difficult problem that is LITERALLY DESTROYING ENTIRE INDUSTRIES AS WE STAND DEBATING WHETHER IT'S POSSIBLE? That, for example, journalism has got their smartest minds working on it, and nothing workable is popping out? And so god help an indie like me who doesn't have a fraction of a fraction of the clout of, say, the WSJ?

I mean, your Louis C. K. example is fine, but I'm sure you realize that not everyone in the world is Louis CK. That not everyone has his reach and his reputation, and those are both huge contributing factors to the success of his campaign?
Notably, it doesn't seem like anyone in this thread has bothered looking up the court documents or the emails in question. Here they are, along with lots of background reading: http://skeptiforum.org/t/monsanto-and-the-case-of-unsealed-d...

The 'ghostwriting' refers to a position paper that Monsanto had a choice to either outsource to a number of outside experts at significant cost, or to write themselves, acknowledging the contributions of academics who wrote source material and/or would edit and review the document. And they only intended to do this for sections of the paper that were considered uncontroversial in the scientific community, with direct authorship in sections dealing with matters of contention.

It generally seems to be the case that most all stories of this nature are overreaching considerably by taking juicy sounding quotes out of context. It's remarkably analogous to the Climategate 'scandal' on close examination.
I want to create a new operating system even though we don't need one right now. So this looks very attractive to me. Thanks for posting.
Usually the only thing that should be shared is base process bootstrap related code. So for example I've used a shared lib in a microservices environment which had common boilerplate code for starting a web server that connected to a database, and initializing a router.

The other microservices all included this shared library, and it benefited devs by providing them with an easy way to create a new microservice quickly without having to recreate a bunch of boilerplate. It also provided an easy way to centrally manage a few things like the version of express (the node.js web server we chose) and a few other things. By updating that central lib the rest of the microservices would all get upgraded automatically the next time we rebuilt them.
macOS Sierra unfortunately still ships with 3.2.
My complaints about JS have nothing to do with the DOM. Like weird `this`, no integer types, surprising type coercion rules, and so forth.