skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I touched upon this, but honestly this is a very, very large subject that requires familiarity with the Berne Convention and TRIPS/ACTA in order to fully explain.

In the Canadian decision, the de-listing order is contingent on that order not being contrary to compliance requirements elsewhere in the world. However, the SCC doesn't have knowledge of all of those laws, nor should it. Accordingly, it stated the burden upon showing a contradiction rests with the applicant, Google, who didn't want to comply with the order. Google would need to cite specific laws they were in contravention of, rather than just pleading that there may, maybe, somehow be a contradictory requirement. What if there wasn't? Should Google still get to plead international comity in that instance? No.

Positive freedom of speech legislation might work as an alternate requirement, but this was not plead, and this was not a situation where the speech in question is political or particularly protected. It is a very clear instance where a supplier has fled Canada (and they can't find where they're based) in order to attempt to continue crystal clear trademark violations which are causing actual damage to a Canadian business.

The current international trademark framework means that the majority of nations in the world would actually require compliance with this order (well, not exactly, but close enough). The big question is how that machinery should be activated. If the Respondent had the money to pursue passing-off litigation in every jurisdiction, they would likely arrive at a similar result, but functionally, a small company won't be able to pay x200+ times the legal fees for a similar result while their dealflow is being sapped.

This decision, even read very broadly, wouldn't provide countries with the ability to de-index items. Countries don't need that ability; they already have it. Most, however, have bound themselves not to exercise it, but certain, like China, actively pursue control as an overt element of their policy agenda.

I feel like I'm doing a bit of a disservice to the topic, because there is a lot of small nobs and levers that I can't get into without exploding this into a 20 page memorandum. I am confident in stating that the freedom of speech concerns arising from this case are not as dire as portrayed.

Edit: Made the middle a bit clearer.
This occurs mostly in private student loans vs. federal ones. Private offers even fewer options than the federally mandated ones provide.
My belief is that the US freedom for curiosity is a side effect of being wealthy post WW2 relative to the other countries. The extraneous buffer allowed people to party through college and still make a living but is non-competitive when everyone else is actually learning. (at an accelerated rate due to the internet)

The globalization theoretically works both ways but most Americans aren't willing to live like kings in some other country due to cultural differences, perhaps even a disdain for other cultures. Safety is also often a concern, but overblown as the US is actually very unsafe due to its gun culture. The true value of a dollar on the international scene isn't revealed as most Americans are limited in how they can use their dollar.
Mentioned above, but the survey data indicates the effects on multi-site employers was likely more negative.

http://m.startribune.com/seattle-study-shows-low-wage-jobs-d...
Like his own personal chaos monkey.
How do you square the Constitution of Canada with the Human Rights Commission that fines comedians and authors?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Human_Rights_Commissi...
You have quite a lot of freedom in Qatar if you have money and almost none if you do not.
Well how much do I gain by a bit more speed after you took your horrendous 18 cents per gb flowing out?
One might wonder what benefits alternate uses for scarce resources spent chasing chemistry could have provided for alchemy instead.
Mental Health Problems Rising Among College Students
My mental model for this is as follows:

1. If you are a company based in and operating as a legal entity in Country X, the laws of Country X apply to your business as a whole, including services you offer in Country Y and Country Z.

2. If you are a company based in and operating as a legal entity in Country X but are offering services in Country Y, the laws of Country Y apply only to the services you offer in that Country Y.

All of this can then get mushy and complicated based on international governing bodies, multinational trade agreements and nation-state soft power but absent those constraints, I believe this holds.
>due to flaws in their reasoning or refusal to consistently apply their own reasoning for personal reasons

That's not the entirety of it. The problem is that these ethical problems exist within a certain societal framework, and that framework is made of multiple overlapping assumptions, habits, traditions, and expectations, some of them contradictory. Two people's axioms might be identical, but they may come to two opposite conclusions over whether these identical axioms apply to a given situation based on how they each subjectively weight the assorted related circumstances. They'll BOTH claim that the other's bad conclusion is due to "flaws in their reasoning", and can still both have perfect internally consistent reasoning for their own conclusion. Ethics isn't physics. There often ISN'T a right or wrong answer, only a variation in assumptions.
I'd also like to mention this, which may cast doubt on the "gay people are born gay" idea:

Children who experience parental divorce are less likely to marry heterosexually than those growing up in intact families; however, little is known about other childhood factors affecting marital choices. We studied childhood correlates of first marriages (heterosexual since 1970, homosexual since 1989) in a national cohort of 2 million 18-49 year-old Danes.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17039403
My vision is becoming reality.
Yep, that's what I was trying to get at, but failed in my explanation.

Everything's eventually consistent on an ever-present sphere around the incident expanding at the speed of light. No faster.

Even if the sun were to blink out of existence, we'd have 8 minutes that we wouldn't know. Gravity would still be there, holding Earth in place. The light would still warm us. Then 500 seconds later, darkness. We'd be flung out on a tangential course.
> and serves as an employment subsidy for many small businesses that would, otherwise, not employ anyone

It would serve as a generous subsidy to _any_ employer that doesn't want to pay a living wage. It's not clear to me why the federal government should be subsidizing the practices of companies like Walmart, who are already costing the government $6.2 billion in public assistance[1]. But that's effectively what an expanded EITC would do [2].

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-...
[2] http://www.princeton.edu/ceps/workingpapers/165rothstein.pdf
I see your point, but the Internet has made this question a little tricky: they shouldn't be allowed to restrict what happens in other countries, but they should (or at least, they think they should) be allowed to restrict what happens in their own, and Google removing results only for .ca clearly fails to accomplish that. Countries and their courts aren't going to accept "we can't accomplish this order because global internet" for much longer, and the only way I can see to square this circle is more internet Balkanization, which is probably going to accelerate dramatically in the next decade.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14652276 and marked it off-topic.
Sure, but I think you might be missing an important aspect. The system is designed to not block communications upon key changes, just display an alert so the other user knows (And can verify out of band if they are about to discuss a sensitive topic). The initial "vulnerability" seemed to just be based on an opinion that it would be more secure if it did indeed block communications (until manual verification was performed) upon key changes.

You are correct that it is impractical to "exploit" the chosen design, I think the bigger issue their portrayal of this as a vulnerability rather than a security suggestion.
Because each duplicated tab has the full history. No need to preserve the original search tab.
It says "full time job" hired as a "programmer" which to me at least, makes an hourly wage unlikely.
> That sure sounds like an assertion of what a court or jury would actually decide, and it's far too strong. (I am a lawyer, and there's almost never a justification for being this absolute.)

It's obviously an opinion piece, the way it's written does not communicate that it's attempting to be informative other than collecting a number of other more informative articles, and offering the author's viewpoint. Contrary to what some on here believe, it is alright to both bring information forth about a topic and express an opinion on it, and personally I find that type of content much more engaging than exercising false equivalency nonsense and making a stupid company's stupid position look less stupid in the name of "fairness."

> As for Zillow not owning the rights

If it owns the rights or is licensed to exercise the rights, that doesn't change the fact that it has no case. That was my point.
Clickbait and flagged. Headline could also read

FBs secret rules protect Asian women but not black drivers.

or

FBS secret rules protect black men but not white cheesemakers.

As revealed in the body:

PG x PG = PG

PG x NPG = NPG
Did you read the whole article? You totally whooshed on the meaning of owner.
keepass or similar
If the UI is quick to inform I'm happy to wait for a big task to finish.

Even if the message is nonsense, I just want to know work is still occurring

"Reticulating splines" may not mean the app is just reticulating splines, but I know it's doing something, and I'm less concerne my Sim City hasn't loaded

But with things like my iPhone where the UI just halts after some requests and quits responding to input without me knowing why, is bullshit

I want my software to listen to me and inform me about the status of work I'm performing

I wish more work was done in operating system UIs informing users. I use a terminal a lot and can see what's going on as I work

The OS should be capable of detecting overload, and take control enough to alert to degraded general operation and inform as to what's up. Possibly offering options to resolution
>to other browser which are as good and better than Chrome

In which ways? I use Chrome because I'm used to it by now, and it doesn't seem to be lacking for features or extensions. I say this as a full stack engineer who spends plenty of time building React front-ends and using the dev tools. Can you tell me what I might gain by switching away from Chrome?
If you're ascribing the pseudoscience in this analogy to the parent's position, you have it backwards.
Apparently it's a feature in the base version of firefox, just not one that's exposed prominently (I can't find a menu option - only mouse & keyboard shortcuts).
Hey everyone. This is my first submission on Hacker News. O'Reilly also created a short blog post announcing their shift from selling ebooks direct to Safari subscription service and Amazon.

https://www.oreilly.com/ideas/were-reinventing-too
SSD swap stats?
I did transcribe it wrong; it's phonetically [ɒ] for me -- cot-caught is in effect.

Though this does give opportunity to point out that even phonemic transcriptions can have dialectal differences. There is no one phonemic transcription for English, as the different vowel mergers mean that minimal pairs differ between groups. This kind of variation tends not to happen as much with consonants as vowels, which make them much harder to transcribe even phonemically. But, for example, here's a list of mergers for non-rhotic dialects:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhoticity_in_English#Mergers_c...
Try neither: qutebrowser. It has built-in vim keybindings (configurable), a lot of opportunities for customization/hacking, and it's open source and maintained by a great developer who cares about the project and has run a number of successful kickstarters to support its development. It uses QtWebEngine, so it's hip with all the modern standards.

http://qutebrowser.org/
That is completely untrue. When researchers have actually taken the time to do IQ testing in poor communities, they find a similar distribution of high and low IQ's as in the general population. There are a lot of 130 IQ people living in the slums.
GPO Announces Digital Release of Historical Congressional Record for the 1950s
Diabetes management platform Glooko raises $35M
I guess we are pretty much at the peak of synthetic oil and it is a dead end in terms of energy storage.
Protecting groups? This is really backwards. Does it matter who i want to kill ? It's ok to say kill all the children, but not OK to say man shouldn't be invited to a women-only party? Excluding a politician just because he's politician? This is the result of what happens when you give the job to the wrong kind of people. It sounds like you've tried to let a mathematician do a philosopher's job.

There should be clear red lines. You either suggest actual physical harm to a group or a person, or you don't. Which group is irrelevant. Anything else, as long as no harm will be done to a person, I don't care how offensive you find something. If you don't want to read it move along to the next page please.

If people want black segregation or to deny the holocaust (I'm jewish and most people here see this as a huge red line) - let them. These discussions will happen, within facebook or ourside it, these opinions will be shared. Let them say it, and let the people who disagree state their opinion and try to convince. Stop the bubble, stop the misconception that arguing is bad, if you really care about something, stop trying to shut mouths and start working hard on convincing people. When was the last time telling someone to shut up ever changed something for good. And if you actually let people argue anonymously it'd be much better.
I dug into this a little bit and can't figure out why. We don't actually do anything with JS that would affect scrolling. If you feel like emailing me with more details I'll keep lookin'.
I agree! This is part of why I am skeptical about the application of this law to other factual scenarios. The court is ruling in the basis of the absence of any evidence provided by Google to rectify the order.

Had they pleaded the above law and indicated that there were real and substantial concerns in this case, the outcome may have been different. I think Google didn't because this is a picture perfect passing-off case which is illegal straight across the WTO.

---

Edit: This passage from the ruling makes it clear that a key piece of the SCC rationale is very, very specific to this case:

"D and its representatives have ignored all previous court orders made against them, have left British Columbia, and continue to operate their business from unknown locations outside Canada. E has made efforts to locate D with limited success. D is only able to survive — at the expense of E’s survival — on Google’s search engine which directs potential customers to D’s websites. This makes Google the determinative player in allowing the harm to occur. On balance, since the world‑wide injunction is the only effective way to mitigate the harm to E pending the trial, the only way, in fact, to preserve E itself pending the resolution of the underlying litigation, and since any countervailing harm to Google is minimal to non‑existent, the interlocutory injunction should be upheld." [Emphasis added]

There are a number of requirements for obtaining an injunction. The key case for determining if an injunction will be granted itself is RJR Macdonald. It provides a fairly large bulwark to stopping stupid injunctions from being used. It requires that the issue be serious, that the harm caused by it be irreparable, and that the balance of convenience favor the arrangement sought. These aren't easy hurdles to jump over.
I think the problem is that we have one network doing many things that need to have builtin redundancy both in terms of messaging and data storage. So putting a bank's entire database into Azure or AWS isn't wise in my opinion. Rather, I think the network either needs to be fragmented to serve different sets of customers or the end points need to be improved to the point that onsite hosting becomes the norm again. Centralization is much like specialization in that it can be adopted to the point of diseconomy.
Doing so would have significantly lowered my chances of getting the right one.
Take a look at http://coingenius.io/exchanges
I recommend looking at bittrex, Bitshares DEX, and Kraken although Kraken has been experiencing hiccups lately.
What would make the most difference in the quality of life for those on the street would be public showers, public restrooms accessible 24/7, and access to secure and affordable temporary storage in order to leave possessions temporarily without losing them. Boxes installed along sidewalks which could accept change like a parking meter and be set to a combination to unlock - and would remain locked until the time runs out. That would make a huge difference, enormous. The loss of paperwork and documentation as well as clothing and other possessions is a constant problem for those on the street - and the inability to leave the bags behind and not be immediately recognizable as homeless is a huge barrier and trap.

It surprises me that laundromats in the bay area do not have pay showers similar to truck stops. When you must carry all of your possessions it would be nice to be able to be free of dirty clothes (and body) after doing laundry. There are, of course, a few shower facilities which open and close at specific hours and people must stand in line to shower in a shared room with others without control of the water temperature. It is an experience to be avoided. I assure you that 'bird baths' in public restrooms are a far better option. Dignified public showers. That would make an enormous difference in quality of life.

And of course, restrooms. It is absurd and repugnant that the bay area, with the enormous homeless population fails to provide public restrooms accessible at all hours. This, again, is an issue of human dignity and it is also an issue of sanitation and health.

Those are the three things that would make the most difference - restrooms, showers, secure temporary storage - and would prevent homelessness from being an inescapable trap. It would allow people to be functional and presentable in the world, to be able to find employment and have options.
The average citizen values YOUR garbage collector far less than they value Oprah.

They value their own, certainly, but that value is reflected by the enormous sums we collectively pay to have our garbage removed. The garbage industry is worth a lot more than Oprah.

You also pay (indirectly) your garbage worker a lot more than you pay (indirectly) Oprah, so things might be working out closer to how you value them than you'd expect.
Does that mean we have anprjer happy hn Firefox-user now? :-)
Speaking from experience, the first 6 times you are reported all that happens is a popup telling you to delete the file and then click to re-enable. On the 7th time you then have to call customer service where they will tell you that if you have to call 6 more times they will suspend the account for 6th months. When I mentioned that I would switch providers before serving a 6th month ban, the customer rep was very quick to reassure that it never happens.

(This is what you have to deal with when you're technology chair for a 40 person fraternity)
Got it, thank you! I was not trying to criticize this piece of software, just had thought it might be worth mentioning in case folks were curious (As past Vault7 releases had indeed made mention of exploits used).
I am fixing, but I am one person with one brain and two hands.
Ideally into solid carbon bricks that could be used as a building material and last practically forever.
This plan is to start building the foundations at age 5 so that by the time they move into secondary education (age 12) they can program.
Ask HN: How to become a great API designer?
I suppose that's because they take the standpoint that they have so much testing code available, that any conflicts with the grammar are easily found.

However, in general, you can easily shoot yourself in the foot with a handwritten parser, because you can't see the conflicts by looking at the code locally.
> Are you familiar with Cui bono?

Of course. It's a very good heuristic for where to start an investigation; the guilty party is often found among the people that benefit. It can also be a plausible motive.

However, as evidence it's only circummstanti8al. I shouldn't accuse you of robbing your local bank simply because you could have benefited from the stolen cash.

> are generally accepted as Russia's doing despite any concrete evidence

A lot of people have been making fallacious claims about Russia (and other places). I suspect that Putin is responsible for some of tho9se claims, but that doesn't mean they all are. Argumentum ad populum is still a fallacy,
They are all the products of bi-lateral or multi-lateral treaties, hammered out in secret meetings between senior members of participating governments.

There is absolutely no "International community" involved in this process. It's a private settlement between directly affected parties.

These agreements also tend to be incredibly undemocratic, and are often hilariously hostile to the interests of the constituents of said governments. Be careful what you wish for - what you'll get is less like the European Union, and more like the TPP.
Their comment history seems ok, too. Oddly, their dead comments are not chronologically contiguous.
That does not support your claim Canada has no concept of freedom of speech in the Constitution.
What about logging?
By gradually learning and/or discovering what constitutes a great API.
Those stories would get onto /show and also the front page if they got more upvotes, so it is indeed a curation problem. If you're willing to do the work of rescuing good submissions that the rest of us missed, that's great! I wonder if we could integrate that back into HN somehow.
> Asking for their perspectives is a sensible way to investigate what the reason may be.

Is it? Why?

When patients visit the ER, they often believe that whatever change in their diet that they're aware of and focused on -- like eating cabbage last week -- must be the cause of their ailment.

When parents had their children diagnosed with autism, they cast their net for the nearest change to be blamed ... and found vaccines.
I learned about this from an interview on a TV show where people who rescued wolves explained how their wolves came to be there and why people shouldn't have wolves as pets.

I've run across the tidbit at other places, but nothing that I can easily google for at the moment. (Googling for "wolf pet dominance" comes up with debates about training pet dogs by establishing yourself as the alpha.)
Ask HN: How should the tech industry defend against ransomware attacks?
More secure programming languages? an new OS feature? A feature built into HDD firmware?
Nope, that's a low end estimate of writes.

"Every 60 seconds on Facebook: 510,000 comments are posted, 293,000 statuses are updated, and 136,000 photos are uploaded."

https://zephoria.com/top-15-valuable-facebook-statistics/amp...
> Also, your comment is basically a personal attack.

Isn't yours? (The first one)

He used your comment as a framework.
ONE REASON NOT TO SHOUT
Written in my passport, mixed in with visa stamps. Hard to tell what they might mean if you don't know what to look for.