skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That assumption of an 'implicit' grant is quite tenuous. You have taken it as invalidated by a PATENTS file, what if instead of a PATENTS file Facebook legal had blogged that they don't believe in an implicit grant? Does that nullify the grant of patents? What if stated by a project contributor?

That's the conundrum for any open source project and the exposed danger of the BSD license.
> one of my two arguments is that communication is too abstract a thing to be regulated or abridged by the interstate commerce clause.

You have to separate the speech from the infrastructure. It's no argument to say that a law requiring UPS and FedEx to deliver packages to all households (instead of only white households) is a free speech violation, just because packages contain documents and other media. The law isn't proscribing any particular content, it's only requiring common carriers to be common carriers.

> I agree with you about end-to-end encryption but the Qwest Communications thing I think helps make my first point. We shouldn't want the federal government having such economic and legal leverage in this space.

The source of the leverage isn't legislation, it's jurisdiction. ISPs have huge physical infrastructure investments that they can't just pick up and move to another country if the US government is leaning on them, so they fold.

> To do this you have to allow money transactions higher up in the network topology.

This I think is the root of the misunderstanding.

It makes no sense to have Joe pay Comcast directly and have Joe pay Comcast by way of Netflix. All that does is create unneeded transaction costs for no reason, compared with having Joe pay the total amount going to Comcast directly to Comcast.

It's only a subterfuge calculated to disguise the fact that the Comcast aims to leverage their ISP monopoly to damage competitors in video content. Netflix has to pay Comcast actual money, but Comcast-video nominally paying Comcast-ISP is just moving money between two pockets in the same pants. They want to give their own video service an unfair advantage. There is no reason to engage in that inefficient money laundering triangle unless there is something dubious going on that requires artificial complexity to obfuscate.

> But not their own QoS bits for telephone and cable services. Likewise why not let Vonage or Netflix pay for this special treatment?

Because it allows the monopoly abuse subterfuge, as opposed to having the ISP sell the feature directly to the end users. Which apparently nobody wants enough for it to even be offered.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3561995/Police-inves...

Although I don’t know what this does to your statistics; Foxconn employed and houses 2x magnitude more workers vs the apple campus (which houses none)
No. The PATENTS portion of BSD+Patents does not nullify the BSD License. So you are no worse off than had Facebook simply licensed the code under the BSD License.
Comparisons with rail are probably poor. While rail was nationalized, usage fell, as soon as rail was privatised again in the 90s usage has increased back up at a trend almost perpendicular to that seen when nationalised.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Great_Britai...
I gave up on New Balance (Trump) and needed something 993-like, a good stability trainer. I did a fair amount of web research. I found something bad before I found ASICs GT-1000 5s which came in my width 4E and size. I bought last year's model on Amazon for $45. They're better than the 993s were. They might be the best shoes I've ever had.
I wonder how much BSD + patents actually diminishes lawsuits for Facebook. Is React that widespread? What happens if you stop using React, and replace it with a clone like Preact?

I also wonder if this will hold up in court, or is purely a defensive measure.
?? As do literally tens of millions of people in the UK.
I'm just saying because of the lack of systemic solutions (or cures to fit the subject of the thread) you're describing, conscientious doctors are penalized to some extent and that's not cool.

Addendum: More oversight and regulation over all the doctors would be much more complex than just concentrating on the two enormous industries muddling the situation in the first place. Doctors' jobs have already become incredibly bureaucratized over the years and introducing more complex rules to simply address the symptoms rather than the root cause seems wasteful.
Technically that would be something like Haskell's, but I only have surface-level fluency. More to the point would be the most complex stuff I've had reason to do with a type system, which caps at around this generic state machine:

https://play.rust-lang.org/?gist=3fdb20c34d589a2576c6bb137b9...

(TL;DR: A type that encodes a state machine (and is generic over the implementation) that allows you to guarantee reaching a terminating state.)

In practice I rather my types looking much plainer, though:

https://github.com/llogiq/bytecount/blob/master/src/lib.rs
Also, importantly, he's facing a felony narcotics charge because the mushrooms contain psilocyben, not because he illegally gathered some park fauna (almost certainly a misdemeanor charge).

Admittedly, the article muddies this water, but it's our crazy drug laws that are to blame for his predicament, otherwise he'd just be facing a fine or perhaps a few days in jail.
Secure Contact Form with PHP, AJAX and HTML5
I've been flying for the last 15 years regularly and never once witnessed someone forewarning the passenger behind they were clear to recline their chair.
> NHS costs less than half the cost of the American system for similar outcomes and it worked really really well when funded at the level of other European countries under the last Labour government.

[Citation needed (for "similar outcomes")]. The NHS has always been cost efficient but fairly bad when it comes to outcome.
Gee, you don't say.
"the average payment to physicians was $15, the top 1 percent of physicians reported receiving more than $2,600 annually in payments"

Neither is enough to sway most physicians IMO. This seems to me like trying to stir up a scandal where there really isn't one.

I did hear on the radio today that 90% of prescription opiates are sold in USA and Canada, with the bulk of that being the USA. Other countries treat pain more holistically.
The affiliate links message is clear enough for my taste, I wouldn't call it disguised. I clicked the link because I thought it might be about turning real eyes into monitors, but that's because I'm an idiot, I'm sure most others understood what it was about, so I wouldn't call it spam. I much prefer the affiliate link form over all others, it's the only form of ad that I think can be truly called "unobtrusive." If the site didn't have Google Analytics, I would call it a perfect example of how monetization through advertising should be done. Web standards should have prevent other methods by default.
Which makes me wonder: do mycologists (mushroom scientists) get a legal license to pick mushrooms wherever the heck they want? Let's say this really is a completely new, unidentified species that only grows in this national park. Then what?
Database Giant Oracle Wants Better Governance for Blockchains
ELI5 anyone? My basic understanding is if you use React and decide to sue FB for patent infringement down the line, FB can countersue(?) bc they revoke your grant to use the patent upon you suing them. But what _exactly_ constitutes using React? Of course using the library is one thing, but what about using some other library that installs React as some dependency? Does using JSX also count as using "React"? I just feel that what exactly constitutes using React is very vague esp considering there are many non-FB tools that use "React" (and associated technologies, eg the idea of Virtual DOM) in some form or another.
Mozilla can solve this problem the right way by doing what debian does when it wants to collect statistics: Ask users if they want to donate their information to Mozilla on first run or during the installer.

Recording users' behavior by default with informing the user clearly and giving him the option to opt-out is abhorrent, regardless of the benignity of the reason behind it.

Disclosure: I use firefox, but periodically strip all relevant hidden add-ons and disable all information sending possible.
Ah. I see your point. I failed to consider the context of this application in particular.
Checkout the histograms: https://telemetry.mozilla.org/
Do other vendors let you see their metric dashboards?

And if you feel statistics of time to FIRST_PAINT invades your privacy you can disable telemetry reporting.

You can also see what your browser collects in about:telemetry, but don't equate performance measurements with surveillance -- that's FUD.
Shame on you for pickung on a 14 years old scared child trying to survive and escape the concentration camps just to forward your agenda
Facebook's license means you lose the license to React if you sue Facebook for any patents, not just for patents that are related to React. That's the core problem here.
Dropbox is now at petabyte scale. Last I had a conversation with someone at Dropbox they mentioned they’re moving storage in-house but still use quite a bit of AWS for service.

I think hybrid totally makes sense where you take the most expensive part bare metal with limited scope of maintenance.
I was just trying to point out that rational people will do silly things for free lunches. And the original claim that lunches wouldn't make a difference in opiod prescription is not always true.
No, that’s not what the article says in totality, have you read it? Your statement that in all cancer you’re 50% more likely to die in the UK requires at least a link. It’s just not supported. With prostate cancer the linked article explains the difference.
So it looks like those kinds of news is not tailored to the user, right?

What's interesting is how beneficial is the news curated by an ML algorithm. If we optimize the content presented to the user by the metric of his engagement, that a slippery slope, as we know that the majority of people would unconsciously click on click-bait articles which might not be the most interesting, relevant or beneficial for them. Moreover, there is a risk of opinion bias, as we clearly seen with Facebook during the recent US presidential campaign.

Which in turn raises the question: "Is consuming news (even if tailored to your preferences) is the best way to have a well-rounded view of the world"?
Met some NHS technical staff back in 2009 or so at a Linux meetup: they were grizzled, hardcore knowledgeable, hard working and underpaid.
Reminds me of... what was Gabor's email app again?
Graffiti is vandalism, i.e., a property crime. Poaching, by definition, is hunting an animal that is restricted for varying reasons, from being a protected species to herd management, etc. It's effectively taking something that doesn't belong to you.

In this case, he did break the law by picking mushrooms where it was specifically prohibited, and it would be reasonable to cite him for that fact.

But it wasn't about theft, it was about the fact that he wanted to ingest a compound which would alter his state of consciousness. That should not be a crime.
The "weak" terminology has a flaw because it sometimes means "leaves type errors undetected, with undefined behavior" and sometimes it refers to a situation whereby a character string like "3.14" can be treated as a number and such.

Awk and Perl are not weakly typed in the same sense that C is weakly typed.
Yeah, I got tons of pushback when I tried to steer Automattic and the WordPress community away from React in 2015 with people saying not to worry:

"Replace React with Mithril for licensing reasons"
https://github.com/Automattic/wp-calypso/issues/650

Personally, I increasingly doubt that BSD+PATENTS is even GPL-compatible -- and so potentially Automattic may be violating the GPL by using React integrated with WordPress.

What's especially sad about this is that React isn't even that good compared to other vdoms like Mithril and Inferno and others. React just has a lot of name recognition and mindshare from the Facebook association (which then translates into a rich-get-richer effect with more tutorials and components).

Here is a list of more than twenty alternative vdoms I put together in January 2016 (although Mithril remains my favorite):
https://github.com/dojo/meta/issues/11#issuecomment-17679024...
I think it's that "the idea that an organization is able and willing to impose its will like this against others" is a total misrepresentation of what the project is.
Does this work in embedded browser? More often than not I don't open links within Twitter/Reddit mobile app bc I can't stand some intrusive ads.
This needs the ability to destroy pages when leaving the app. That way I can't accidentally leave my porn in a tab and have someone find it later
Having delusional cult leaders talking about the fractal universe and how we are all the same and how everything would be fixed if we just gave up our ego is bad for society.
Meanwhile I had like 3 boxes of powder and two of the bottles and had no problems whatsoever.

Believe what you want, I guess.
Can you link to an article on 3) ? We have been releasing by invoking kubectl from Circle, I wasn't aware that GKE can release itself.
> We've been looking for ways around this and have reached out to ASF to see if we could try to work with them, but have come up empty.

There's a pretty obvious solution to this: relicense React. The fact that Facebook isn't even considering that is a pretty strong indication that they "weaponized" their license on purpose.

> To this point, though, we haven't done a good job of explaining the reasons behind our BSD + Patents license.

I think we already understand the reasoning behind it.

> As our business has become successful, we've become a larger target for meritless patent litigation.

And the solution you chose stops merit-ful litigation as well.

> We respect third party IP, including patents, and expect others to respect our IP too.

Clearly you don't, because you've intentionally designed a license to allow you carte blanche to violate other companies' patents if they're dependent enough upon React to not be able to easily stop using it.
Disappointed to see no forward upfront stance on what Facebook will do if someone sues them for a patent infringement unrelated to React in any way.

Will note though that if Facebook does choose to revoke a license on the basis of getting sued for something unrelated it will definitely reflect poorly on FB in the developer community and reduce React's adoption.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EveryoneOwnsAMac
Yeah. Laws don't have to make us safer, they can have other benefits.

The U.S. Constitution might be a good place to start talking about what laws should do. It says, "...form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity..."
Privatization has always been an incredibly overloaded term when it comes to the NHS. No party is proposing getting rid of state healthcare. The left wing argument against markets in general even interacting with the NHS is usually along the lines of [I don't want those fat cats profiting off peoples health]. This makes me wonder: As long as the care is universal and free, who cares how it's delivered.

I feel the best pro-"privatisation" argument is found in the Liberal Democrat Orange Book.
Brave goes further, it's https by default and even includes fingerprint blocking. It's been my default browser for while now and it's a joy to know I'm not feeding the beast.
It's not the same at all; data structures frequently actually are half the problem, though that's not to say that insight buys you anything.

Let's say I want to stream logging data at a massive rate (~peak core-core bandwidth) to another core and perform complex queries and visualisations on it in sub-frame times. If I have the data structure for that, the rest is bookwork. If I have the type... what have I gained?

Let's say I want to find the best way to represent my data in a way that's amiable to GPU operations. If I find a data structure for that, I'm left with the other half of the job in mapping the transformations I need to GPU calls. If I write some types for it, it's not like GPUs start being any less buggy.

Let's say I'm writing an extension for a Java program with an API not designed for my use-case, and I want to work out how to access stuff that's not directly intended to be exposed. A data structure design isn't much good, since it's an exploratory problem, but neither is assigning types to random things. I still need to figure out how to abuse the API.

Let's say I'm trying to solve the Halting Problem. If I have a data structure for that, I've pretty much proven FALSE, and literally everything is provable. Conversely, I can already give you the type and I'm no closer to solving it.
“Total expenditure includes both public and private expenditures.” So those statistics are meaningless in this context right?
I can't reply to your latest comment, presumably to some stupid pander-y HN ethics rule, but I've seen plenty of people who warn/ask the person behind them that they're going to recline. It's simple courtesy. To be honest, the fact that this doesn't even process with you makes you sound awful to deal with in any sort of transaction.
I once saw a guy first hand with visible addiction to email. He was addicted to email like I was addicted to HN and tech news or other people are addicted to Facebook (news).

There's no more news to read yet you still check. There is no more Facebook post yet you still check. There are no more emails for the day yet you still check.
Uber's Travis Kalanick punches back against the Benchmark lawsuit targeting him
TLDR:

- They confirm Apache's legal reading of the BSD + Patents.

- They deny the part about Facebook being able to steal your IP because Facebook isn't like that.

- They refuse to codify changes to enforce Facebook isn't like that

- We therefore must assume Facebook is like that.
Indeed, preact [1] and and inferno [2] are both MIT Licensed.

[1] https://github.com/developit/preact/blob/master/LICENSE

[2] https://github.com/infernojs/inferno/blob/master/LICENSE.md
I think the reasoning that this will protect them against frivolous lawsuits is pretty poor; you only need a patent grant if you're actually building software. Patent trolls don't build anything so they have no need for patent grants.
Pressing "Erase browsing history" in the Android persistent notification bar seems to do this.
As I understand the asymmetry in the BSD+patents license, the real issue here is that usage of React significantly weakens you with respect to mounting a defense against Facebook for infringing upon your own patents or IP, a possibility which, given the stark example of Instagram Stories, is plainly plausible. (This is not to say that Instagram Stories is patent theft, but rather a propensity to copy ideas wholesale).

Were Facebook to amend that license to soften the criteria for revocation of the license grant in cases of suits against Facebook for infringement, this outrage might just go away. But as it stands now, Facebook stands to exercise an ability to infringe on others' patents for monetary gain so long as the patent holder uses React in deployment. It would be easy to weaponize this arrangement, and you have to assume that any fiduciary would consider it.

More broadly, this is a good case to be made against software patents in general.
Don’t forget that they use a calcium carbonate instead of calcium phosphate. Calcium carbonate has significantly less bioavailability and Soylent still claims to have 100% of your DV.
Why don't you buy a battery pack as those are rare occasions (don't need all that battery weight for day to day use) and batteries are cheap nowadays.
One thing I don't understand about soylent is how it can be so expensive and yet still so flawed.

First, as a male I am concerned about isoflavones. I've read sources that go either way on how much it actually affects hormone levels, but since I suspect there is a lot more pressure from the agriculture / vegetarian community to make it seem safer than it is than from any other community to not, I lean towards it not being that good for you.

Second, the consistency is absolutely terrible. They don't need to make it too seedy, but leaving some of the nuts and seeds at least somewhat coarse would improve its texture beyond "slime that makes your teeth feel terrible and gross".

As is, it doesn't even make economic sense, because I can feed myself much tastier food than soylent for like $3-6 a day. Like, why would you choose soylent over food such as eggs, chicken, spinach, broccoli, oatmeal, etc?

What I really wish someone would do, is make a milk-based soylent with stuff that is actually good for you like sunflower seeds. That would actually taste good and probably be much better for you.
[EFF] Google, other tech companies warned over ‘dangerous’ banning of neo-Nazis
This suggests an implicit grant is better than an explicit more limited grant: http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Implicit_patent_licence

From there:

In 2005, Dan Ravicher explained[2] that, in the USA, recipients of software under the GNU GPL version 2 receive an implicied patent grant, based on the following US case law.

* De Forest Radio, 273 U.S. 236 (1927)
"No formal granting of a license is necessary in order to give it effect. Any language used by the owner of the patent, or any conduct on his part exhibited to another from which that other may properly infer that the owner consents to his use of the patent in making or using it, or selling it, upon which the other acts, constitutes a license."

* Hewlett - Packard Co. v . Repeat - O-Type Stencil Mfg. Corp. , Inc., 123 F. 3d 1445 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
"Generally, when a seller sells a product without restriction, it in effect promises the purchaser that in exchange for the price paid, it will not interfere wit h the purchaser's full enjoyment of the product purchased. The buyer has an implied license under any patents of the seller that dominate the product or any uses of the product to which the parties might reasonably contemplate the product will be put."

* Bottom Line Mgmt., Inc. v. Pan Man, Inc., 228 F. 3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2000)
"Unless the parties provide otherwise, the purchaser of a patented article has an implied license not only to use and sell it, but also to repair it to enable it to function properly. This implied license covers both the original purchaser of the article and all subsequent purchasers"
What a fantastic idea! I'd really encourage you to create this pamphlet and post it around Wavestorm forums.
> Most of the time I'd recommend the new type-safe union std::variant

Neither g++ 7 nor Clang/LLVM 4.0.1 support std::variant yet :-(. We started a new (blank buffer) codebase earlier this year and decided to use C++17 as the implementation language, which has exposed us to the gaps...which are surprisingly few! But sadly this is one of them.
"A sign posted nearby [in Cape Disappointment Park] read: NO MUSHROOM PICKING: VIOLATORS SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL CITATION. Corbett ignored it....Close by, in the grass, he spotted true [Psilocybe azurescens]. More of the mystery mushrooms grew by the spot where Corbett had parked his truck.

"...He picked 10 specimens from the woodchip pile, and put them in a plastic bag along with 10 of the classic azurescens. “I put them together because they were clearly different, with no mistake whatsoever. They don’t look anything alike.”"

Sounds like he was picking the unidentified Psilocybe along with Psilocybe azurescens.